Should age of consent laws apply to males?

aneeshm

Deity
Joined
Aug 26, 2001
Messages
6,666
Location
Mountain View, California, USA
An interesting question I came across when pondering the age of consent laws of India.

Over here, the age of consent is 16.

However, this applies only to women. That is, unless it comes under child abuse, it is perfectly legal for a fourteen or fifteen year old to have sex with an older woman of any age whatsoever.

So it works out like this:

a) Boy between the ages of fourteen to eighteen (the ages when you can have sex but are not a child any longer) - can have sex with any older woman. Basically, this is the time when almost everything is fair game.

b) Boy after eighteen - can have sex with any girl older than 16.

c) Girl before 16 - cannot have sex legally (unless probably the male is equally young).

d) Girl above 16 - free for all.



Is this a sensible policy? Should the age of consent for males be lowered to something like fourteen or fifteen in other countries, considering the much lower psychological impact a non-abusive relationship at that age has on us? If it's abusive, that can be dealt with under child abuse laws, but if it isn't, then should the state interfere? Under Indian law, the state doesn't care as long as it isn't abusive.
 
Should the age of consent for males be lowered to something like fourteen or fifteen in other countries, considering the much lower psychological impact a non-abusive relationship at that age has on us?

Where are you getting that from? I'd say its the opposite...
 
If anything, it should be lower for girls than guys.

Not that if I were 14, I'd be upset.
 
Surely the age of consent should be the same for both. Anything else would be discriminatory and flout the principle of equal rights.
 
Surely the age of consent should be the same for both. Anything else would be discriminatory and flout the principle of equal rights.
I disagree that it would be discriminatory, but agree that they should be the same. Girls tend to have sex younger than boys because they tend to go for older people, so if the consent for girls was lower, I personally wouldn't think it discriminatory. On a similar note, I don't like how women get paid the same as men at Tennis tournaments - Women play best of 3 sets, men play best of 5. Women have to do less work to win and get paid the same. As far as I'm concerned, that's discriminatory towards men. Things should just be balanced. OK, so women in the past did not get the same status as men, but that's no reason for things to flip the other way around.
 
So males in india can concent at any age? I know of cases in the U.S where female school teachers have sex with boys and it isnt legal obviously.

Im pretty sure theres an age of concent for males here, why isnt there one in india?
 
In the US, there was this one weird case somewhere where a high school (female) teacher wasn't punished for sleeping with a sixteen year old boy. The judge, if what I heard correctly, said "This isn't a case of exploitation. If the boy was a girl, the teacher would be in deep trouble and seen as robbing her of her innocence. But since the victim was just a hormone-driven sixteen year old boy, it was not exploitation. Rather, the boy just got lucky".


heh

I honestly believe that case ruling sufficiently put together what I think about this. If an underage girl sleeps with an overage man, it is a robbing of the innocence and value belonging to the parents' sweet little princess. If an underage boy (14+) does it, it's called getting lucky!

dammnn, booii! ;)

edit: ehem.. so yeah, I don't believe they should be considered the same. Whether or not it should be punished, though I believe, is really a matter for each respective country's legislators. :)
 
So males in india can concent at any age? I know of cases in the U.S where female school teachers have sex with boys and it isnt legal obviously.

A male's consent is taken as valid at any age as long as it is not covered under child abuse laws.

Im pretty sure theres an age of concent for males here, why isnt there one in india?

No idea. But the child abuse laws cover it, so it's not a problem.

Which basically means that from about the age of fourteen on, guys have it pretty good. ;)
 
Boys usually have sex with older girls (exaggerating example: a friend of mine lost his virginity at 14 with a girl who was almost 25) when they start. Girls are much more likely to be abused or forced or influenced than boys. Thus, I believe the age of consent should be lower or not that restrictive for boys. A bit like it is here: it's 15 for girls and boys, yet it is simply not really enforced for boys.
 
I can't answer this one. It seems like it requires a mixture of sociology and child development to honestly answer it. Safe to say that in the USA it would be considered child abuse for a 14 year old male to have sex with an adult woman.

'Consent' seems to mainly be a matter of the guardian's and society's perspective, and lies upon the concept of what age one can becomes legally emancipated.
 
Shouldn't the special age bracket for boys be 14-16, not 14-18?

I mean, I'm not sure what this would mean for a 17 year old boy - they can have sex with anyone older, but also (d) says he can have sex with any girl older than 16, so how does he differ from a boy who is 18 or over?

Also, how does this apply to same-sex sex?

I'm not sure there's evidence that the effect of underage sex is dependent on one's gender. Even if there was a difference, this would likely only be statistical, and I think that's an unfair thing on which to base a law which discriminates.
 
Girls tend to have sex younger than boys because they tend to go for older people, so if the consent for girls was lower, I personally wouldn't think it discriminatory..
Is it merely the opposite?That men tend to approach young girls for sex than women tend to approach young boys for sex?
 
If When I was 14 I honestly would of been thrilled to have sex with a (attractive woman.
 
If When I was 14 I honestly would of been thrilled to have sex with a (attractive woman.

I doubt it.


Meh, this attitude is common really, many men look back and believe it would have been awesome to have been seduced by an attractive woman at that sort of age, but the mistake here is that they are viewing this from the perspective of a grown man, with the life experience that goes along with that. At that age, one would get totally messed up by this, still being underdeveloped, even in some rare case developed physically, but 100% underdeveloped mentally.


If most young guy's wildest dreams were to come true, they would be the victim of some pretty bad psychological effects. I have seen a study on this. showing that boys 'molested' by grown women suffer a lot of psychological problems - just as many as girls 'molested' by grown men. The only difference concluded by the studies was the manner of the problems, generally introverted in women (anorexia, low self confidence, etc) and extroverted in men (Violence).
 
In retrospect it definatly would of been bad.
 
Yes. If it's illegal for a fifteen-year-old girl and an eighteen-year-old boy to do something, it should be just as illegal for a fifteen-year-old boy and an eighteen-year-old girl. Yes, young girls are probably more likely to be exploited, but that doesn't mean the law should be discriminatory.

I think in some places they do apply to both sexes, anyway.
 
Should be the same, always
 
Men and women aren't the same. Why should it be a given that laws regarding the sexuality of the different sexes be the same?

I'm not sure where I stand on this particular issue, but the above question is relevent to it, I think.
 
Back
Top Bottom