Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Our Weird and Inconsistent Views on Sex and Consent
I have been sitting on this post for quite a while, but the Roy Moore accusations really bring the lie to our stupidity when it comes to teenagers, sex, and consent. In many ways, this involves many issues. It has been my contention for a long time that treating teenagers like kids makes them ineffective adults. Why do we treat teenagers like kids? Because their brains are going through huge developmental changes.
Yet those huge developmental changes don’t keep us from saturating in-utero fetuses, babies, toddlers, and preschoolers with a smorgasbord of information and education: classical music, books, mathematics, languages … you name it, we throw it at them. Why? Because some insane amount of the brain is developed by the age of three or four. Neural plasticity thinks that what’s baked into the process makes kids more likely to succeed in those areas later in life.
Ok, but teenagers can’t? When we talk about what happened to our young adults, maybe it shouldn’t be too hard to show that this concept of adolescence has had a huge detrimental effect on them. They aren’t children. They are adults in training. And everyone knows this. How do I know everyone knows this?
Because when someone brings up teaching teenagers abstinence, we think those stupid fuddy-duddies have their heads in the sand. “Don’t you know they are doing it anyway?” we say, derisively. Hmm … do you think its ok for children to be having sex with children? What’s your limit? When is it to early for kids to have sex with kids? Can we get all Brave New World and go with three-four year olds? Or does that offend your sensibilities a little too much? The Germans did it. We like emulating Europe, right? Oh, but its Germany. They disqualified themselves on moral uprightness with Nazis. So maybe eight? Eleven?
According to one of our members, pediatricians comment with complete neutrality on how she should expect her 11-year-old daughter is having sex. Really? I could have sworn the age was 15. At least it was when I was a kid. I was still playing with dolls at 11. My sex fantasies at that age involved dreaming of a girl in the 1860s, sleeping by the fire in a heavy dress, with some cowboy cuddling her. Everyone is fully dressed, FYI. Boom, pregnant. How’s that for 11-year-olds and sex?
Oh, I had it all figured out by the time I reached puberty. Don’t let my innocent, childlike fantasies fool you. I most certainly was a child at 11. And I’m quite certain I was a child at 13 and 14, too, albeit a pretty mature one. When I was 15, I had a crush on my softball coach. I remember my sister confiding in me on how hot Coach H was. Oh, absolutely, I agreed (I was 16, by then … my sister had just started high school). “Which one do you like?” she asked. <Blush> You see, the coach I had a crush on was the 50+-year-old history teacher who had been coaching softball and teaching for nearly 15 years. My sister was talking about his college-aged twin sons who helped coach.
But I didn’t hit on him. I didn’t flirt with him. I had myself together. Does that mean I didn’t know other students who did flirt with teachers? Oh yes, I did. I also knew girls in high school dating much older men. Willingly. You see, if you accept that they are old enough to be having sex, then you are expecting them to be old enough to make life-changing decisions. But we, the real adults in the room, don’t actually think that. But that is the message you give teenagers.
What exactly is the benefit to making life-changing decisions with a fellow teenager stuck in high school and still having to complete four to six years of college to get a decent job? Are you seriously telling me you think girls (who carry the majority of the risk in sexual relationships) are going to be ok with that dynamic? No. Seriously. Tell me. You really think girls are going to be okay having sex with someone who isn’t financially secure? Girls think guys in high school are stupid and not worth their time.
<Insert a Clueless movie clip here.>
So we came up with these laws of legal consent. We knew young, sexually mature girls would be interested in having sex with older people. So we told the older people, the onus is on you — you can’t do anyone under this age. Different states, different rules. My state is 18, with some Juliet laws at 16. Some states have 16.
So for that moving target of adolescent sexual maturity, we have a legal age. Roy Moore allegedly took advantage of that legal age. And in three out of four cases, he engaged in a chaste relationship lasting several months (according to the girls). The fourth one (with a 14-year-old) is the problem, but the people who are out to burn Moore* (who I know nothing of other that the 10 Commandments and this episode) think all four are the problem.
Some of those people who think all four are the problem would be totally cool with their 16-year-olds having sex with their irresponsible 16-year-old boyfriends. Heaven forbid they share a kiss or two with a 32-year-old man!
These are some weird, bizarre, and completely inconsistent views on sex. And I’m not going to claim any kind of moral superiority here — I’m confused as hell, too. On one had, we have teenagers reaching physical and sexual maturity who haven’t a clue how to be mature because we don’t think they are capable of it. On the other hand, we have cultivated an idea that it is ok for children to be having sex (if you are ok thinking teenagers are children and that teenagers have sex, you are good with children having sex).
I understand the point of these “age of consent” laws — at least I think I do. It’s to protect children who reach sexual maturity at incredibly insane ages, like five to eight. But our teenagers are getting mixed messages. Ask me how I know. (I grew up in it!)
So, figure it out. Do age of consent laws mean anything?
*This isn’t about Moore. It’s about how we talk about each of these cases. Three were perfectly legal, but we want to claim that there’s something wrong with them. He wasn’t their teacher, so you don’t get to fall back on that tired line. Either they are old enough to consent or not.
Published in Culture
Yes, I see. Perfectly clear now. That’s exactly the same as a 32-year-old man enticing a 14-year-old girl to meet with him, and taking her to his house away from prying eyes. It’s all clear to me now. Next, you’ll tell us all about “consent”, right? Please continue.
For the record, I am just speaking out against that heinous act, not declaring guilt on Moore. With absolutely no follow up from the MSM on this, I don’t really think at this time that Moore had anything to do with this.
However, I will continue to attack anyone who thinks it’s fine for a 32-year-old man to seduce a 14-year-old. That road leads to evil, and I don’t care if you tell us it was common in the 1940’s.
JudgeMental mentioned an age of consent law that was the same as for driving, drinking, smoking and so on. I didn’t have my mind on multiple stages for the age of sexual consent itself.
On the other hand, if a child 11 or under nominally consented to being seduced, yeah, people might want to consider such a seduction rapey in a way it wouldn’t be if the youth seduced were 16 or over. Even brutal rape would strike many Americans as somehow worse if it were done to the prepubescent.
I can’t assert that the multiple levels make sense, but given how we see an adolescent under the age of consent as still more capable of consent than the utterly prepubescent (whom we protect by considering them to have no capacity for consent whatsoever), I can see why someone might have thought of the three levels.
Although one rationale behind an age below which statutory rape charges can be brought is to make it easier for disapproving parents to credibly threaten, back off, she’s too young for you. That is, it’s not just about protecting children from sexual contact, but about protecting parental control over children, especially daughters.
“We don’t care how much you like being sexed up, daughter dearest – if you don’t knock it off, your precious honeybunch is going to jail, because you’re jailbait” might not be the worst way to shame/scare a young teenage girl into breaking things off.
I agree that the 14 year old is a real problem if true. But the people who are hanging Moore out on a line are decrying all 4. Three of these situations were legally acceptable (and likely acceptable to the teens and parents, as well, as it was a different time and it is legal). Assuming any of it is true.
As I said, this isn’t specifically about Moore. This conversation has been brewing in my head for a while. I think it is ridiculous holding very young high school teachers to a higher standard than their 17 year old students. I have for a long time. And this is definitely affected by my own experience in knowing a boy who had an affair with his teacher. The student was far more predatory than the teacher was. I can say this because I had known him since he was 8 and he was screwed up then.
This conversation is about our attitudes towards sex, adolescents, and consent. @Ralphie encapsulates my issues with this impeccably.
As I told another commenter on the Moore thread, I think homosexuality is wrong. Its legal. I’m kinda stuck with it. Especially since even half of Ricochet thinks its ok. Our ideas of morality on some issues are definitely not identical. I have no issues with 16 year olds willingly having sex with 30 year olds. I really don’t. A 16 or 17 year old boy is just as capable of “playing” a 16 year old girl as a 30 year old man is. A 16 year old is just as likely to believe lies from a 16 or 17 year old as they are from a 30 year old. A 16 year old is just as likely to get pregnant or contract a disease from a 16 or 17 year old as she is from a 30 year old who likes 16 year old virgins.
That last part is gross. But its gross if the guy is 16, 18, 25, or 30. And its gross if the virgin is 16, 18, 21, or 30.
At what point does the 16 year old become an adult? And if it isn’t until she’s 21, then should she be having sex with other children? How sick is that?
Oh man, I have run into a number of straight up predatory 14-16 year old girls.
So question: You don’t think they should have legal consent until 21. But are you ok with 17 year olds having sex with 17 year olds?
Are the consequences of the sex different if they have sex with a 17 year old or a 30 year old? If the girl gets pregnant, is it in the best interest of the parents (both 17) to raise this child? To get married?
Would it be better for a pregnant 17 year old if her lover were old enough to put a roof over her head and care for her and their offspring?
Would it be better for copulating 17 year olds if they were treated like adults, given the same responsibilities as adults, and had access to the same things as adults (work, car loans, home mortgages, rentals)?
Would it be better for 17 year olds who are not capable of provisional security to not be having sex and to be encouraged to make adult decisions about when it is the best time to engage in sexual activity due to life-long consequences?
And we encourage that kind of abstinence throughout our school systems. But sexual abstinence is deemed idiotic by our social betters.
This.
This wasn’t about the 14 year old. It was about 16 year olds at legal age of consent. The 14 year old wasn’t. This is about our outrage over the 16 year olds. Not just the outrage over the 14 year old.
Ok, go there, I am listening. 32-year-old grown man hitting on 16-year-old girls at a high school. Go.
Do you really not understand the difference between considering a prepubescent incapable of sexual consent vs a post-pubescent?
Pre-pubescents don’t know what sex is. “Love” is puppy love… they like hanging out with a person because they are cool (so says my 8 year old). They talk about the same things, play together, and might share a kiss. But I can tell you my son is completely clueless about sex.
How I plan to explain puberty to my 8 year old in a year or so: Soon, your body is going to start going through some changes. A new hormone is going to be produced and its going to affect what your brain tells other parts of your body to do. You will start to get feelings when you see a pretty girl and new things might start to happen to your private parts if you appreciate how she looks (not well worked out, but I have another year or so). This is your body getting you ready for adulthood.
Currently, he simply doesn’t have this problem right now. He is not capable of consent because he has no idea what he is consenting to. A properly educated 16 year old sure better know what she is consenting to and should have been taught on how to say no and when if she is uncomfortable. If we aren’t teaching that, than we are more screwed than I thought.
If she was interested, she was legally able to consent. If she was uncomfortable, her mother should have taught her how to say no.
I might have said yes to a good looking 30 year old if asked and not thought anything of it. I wouldn’t have had sex with him, but I would have agreed to dinner, a dance, hand holding, and a kiss.
I liked older men.
But JcT, I also have issues with thinking its perfectly ok for teenagers (who we think are kids) having sex with other teenagers <period>.
I prefer abstinence. If we think they are children, we treat them like children. And children should not be having sex.
Maybe we got our wires crossed here.
@ejhill, who knows more about it than I do, informed me that there was something nonsensical about the UCMJ having three tiers of sexual offense, based on age of the victim. I agreed with him that I could not gainsay his judgment on this; nonetheless, I could see why some would want a code to have three tiers to it: one tier for prepubescent victims of sex crimes, one for the postpubescent but still underage victims, and one for vicitms of sex crimes at or over the age of majority.
That’s how I feel too. No sex for teenagers. There is no good outcome from it.
I personally went the “wait till marriage” route. In the last months before marriage, it became difficult not to keep testing boundaries. But up until that point, I had a fairly easy time not even wanting to. I understand that’s unusual enough that I can’t expect my kids to inherit this trait.
The best sex-ed advice I got was from my grandma, who said she was glad she waited till marriage (she didn’t want to, but her husband wanted to keep things honorable, and insisted), and that I should wait till marriage, too. But if I didn’t wait, I shouldn’t be dumb about it: I should use contraception.
So, the abstinence-plus curriculum in two sentences.
I like the “icky” rule: Divide by 2, and add 7. The youngest girl a 14 year-old boy should date is 14. A 16 year old boy? 15. 20 year old boy? 17. It works pretty well as a rule of thumb, but defies legal codification.
Stina, you may have liked older men. But does that mean that you should have dated them? I am tempted toward many things that I know are not a good idea – and I consider it my duty to resist those temptations.
With the “icky” rule, the youngest person a 32 year-old should date would be 23.
I don’t know. All I know is that if I had been willing to, I knew what I was consenting to then as much as I did when I was 22. For me, that’s why I did wait til I was 22.
As I said, this whole issue confuses me, too. We tacitly accept that teenagers are mature enough to have sex, but that they are incapable of consenting to sex with someone capable of handling the consequences of that act. While doing that, we hamstring teenagers from being able to handle the consequences of what they are doing. We tell them they are too young for marriage, too young to rent, too young to have their own home…
I also think that treating teenagers like they can’t make responsible decisions sets them up for failure later in life.
What I want is some consistency. If 16 is too young to consent to sex with a 30 year old, then they are to young to consent to sex <period>.
And if they are old enough to consent to sex, then they need to be taught how to handle the consequences, not just abortion, adoption, birth control, and std-protection. If they are old enough to engage, then they are old enough to shoulder responsibility for their behavior – including knowing when and how to say “no”.
And this is a good subjective rule, but if you consider someone an adult, you accept they are capable of making their own decisions.
Good points.
I would rather people got married much younger than they do. It makes being religious far easier and more productive. But you are right, of course, that this only works if we (and they) consider teenagers to be actual adults.
I had heard it be called the Texas Trophy Bride Rule, take the man’s age, divide by two and add 7, and the woman would be appropriate as a Texas Trophy Bride.
The Washington Post On-Line costs only $99 a year, far less than the WSJ or NYT. I have subscribed for a couple of years now, and routinely check the WaPo “Fix” and “Right Turn” a couple of times a day.
I hesitate to comment on the Moore situation because the temperature has risen past the point where it can be discussed calmly. But I wish people would keep in mind that there is one (1) accuser. Her story sounds believable and she told others contemporaneously. So, probably true. The other three “accusers” don’t allege anything awful.
My conclusion from the scant evidence we have is that Moore was a socially insecure man, who went for teenage girls because they scared him less than grown women. Not an uncommon phenomenon.
While his behavior with Corfman was reprehensible, it doesn’t seem to have been replicated. Until there are more allegations from more accusers, I don’t think the label “sexual predator” quite fits.
Wise, thought provoking post. Puerto Rico has 16 for an age of consent with a 4-year close-in-age exception subject to a minimum age of 14. The minimum age at which a Boricua can marry is 16, unless she has been seduced, in which case it is 14. PR is probably not the only place where the laws don’t make much sense.
It seems like a really stupid and offensive thing to say. I’m sure if you asked your daughter now if her 6th grade friends were having sex she would say “of course not”.
If I had a 16 year old daughter, I would rather she go on chaste, chaperoned, courting type dates with a 32 year old man than that she be having sex with a boy close to her age.
l think two people in a sexual relationship together, when they are completely unprepared to deal with the possible consequences of having sex, is a lot more stupid, wicked, and a lot weirder, than a man in a chaste, courting relationship with a woman so young that, if they end up marrying, she’ll consider him the wiser of the two of them and (he imagines) will always easily agree to letting him have the final say on everything.
I’m not saying either situation is ideal.
A fourteen year old is a child. A 30 year old man who gives in to the temptation to have sex with a child is certainly much less excusable than a 16 year old male. And—even though it’s legal, perhaps in Alabama, for an unmarried 16 year old girl to be having sex—if it isn’t truly good for her, then there’s certainly less excuse for a 30 year old man to be involved with her that way than there is for another hormone driven and misguided teenager to be involved with her that way.
The flap over Roy Moore’s past is fascinating for what it reveals about what we still know, in spite of the changes of the past 50 years, and are denying to ourselves—almost repressing in ourselves.
How is it, that a child, who cant change classes without a parent’s consent, can change genders? Someone incapable of making profound life choices is suddenly able to make the longest lasting changes without their parents involvement?
How is THAT a responsible policy?
You are correct. And a few female students. It’s a jungle out there. I guess I was thinking about Hollywood and Washington.
This is a good observation and well stated.
It wasn’t unusual for couples to marry just out of high school in my day way back in the 70s. Girls who got pregnant before graduating got married also. Living together was still scandalous. It is not unusual to find 30 year olds in perpetual engagment status today. Kind of hard to get to that 50th wedding anniversary when you don’t get married until 40.
I consider teens who are driving to be on the cusp of adulthood at the least. The law acknowledges they have sufficient judgement to engage in an adult activity. They get tickets and are assigned fault in accidents (where applicable). There is a current case in Clio, MI, of 5 teens (15-17 yrs) who drove somewhere and loaded up rocks, etc., then drove to an overpass and threw them over onto the expressway killing a young father who was a passenger in a car below. They are not low life kids; one’s parent is on the school board. From what seems to be a prank, 6 families lives are in turmoil and will never be the same. If your kid drives, they need to be considered an adult.
In business law we learned that you cannot enter a contract with a child under 18. We can’t let 17 year olds test drive cars, but they can drive their parent’s.
A pastor once told us that Christ didn’t start his ministry until he was 30, because then he was a mature adult. Yet, his mom was around 14 when she had him.