• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Adulthood

maquiscat

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
21,258
Reaction score
7,862
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
So as not to further derail this thread, I am moving the specific discussion.

When is adult hood? In actuality, I say that it varies with the individual. One person can grow to adulthood by say 17 while others might not make it till 19 or later. However legally it is 18. Period. That is what the law says.
 
maquiscat said:
So as not to further derail this thread, I am moving the specific discussion.

When is adult hood? In actuality, I say that it varies with the individual. One person can grow to adulthood by say 17 while others might not make it till 19 or later. However legally it is 18. Period. That is what the law says.
Click to expand...

I would say it varies by individual, but for MOST people that it isn't until at LEAST 18 years old. Honestly, I've known very few 18-year-olds who behaved or had the qualities of an adult. Most of them are still kids.
 
maquiscat said:
When is adult hood? In actuality, I say that it varies with the individual. One person can grow to adulthood by say 17 while others might not make it till 19 or later. However legally it is 18. Period. That is what the law says.
Click to expand...

I would suggest that "adulthood" is the point in time when society EXPECTS people to be capable of making reasoned decisions and being responsible for their own actions.

Using that definition, I would suggest that "adulthood" SHOULD start at about 14-16 years old. In today's American Society the average youth actually reaches that point somewhere between 28-35 years of age, from my observations.
 
Tigger said:
I would suggest that "adulthood" is the point in time when society EXPECTS people to be capable of making reasoned decisions and being responsible for their own actions.

Using that definition, I would suggest that "adulthood" SHOULD start at about 14-16 years old. In today's American Society the average youth actually reaches that point somewhere between 28-35 years of age, from my observations.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about when society expects them to be then it would be 18 where society has set the legal line for turning into an adult. What we are observing in today's young people however, would be the range you have noted.
 
maquiscat said:
If you are talking about when society expects them to be then it would be 18 where society has set the legal line for turning into an adult. What we are observing in today's young people however, would be the range you have noted.
Click to expand...

I said nothing about when it would be. I commented on when it SHOULD be. There is a difference. By age 13, I wanted nothing to do with the vast majority of my peers. They were immature idiots and I prefered the company of adults. If it truly took any child of mine until age 18 to be truly mature, I would be exceptionally disappointed.

My observations about the age when American children actually mature is based on my personal observations on several different societal levels. It shocks and disgusts me to see 25 year olds who are less mature than my brothers and I were a decade earlier in our lives. It says many things about our society, and none of them are good.
 
That is a good question. There seems to be no single answer; 16 to marry/drive, 18 to vote/join military and 21 to drink alcohol.

It seems that for criminal treatment as an adult then it depends upon the serverity of the crime and the age of the victim/perp.
 
Tigger said:
In today's American Society the average youth actually reaches that point somewhere between 28-35 years of age, from my observations.
Click to expand...

From your observations. That statement tells me more about the affluence you are exposed to within your own community than what happens across the incredibly broad "American Society".
 
maquiscat said:
So as not to further derail this thread, I am moving the specific discussion.

When is adult hood? In actuality, I say that it varies with the individual. One person can grow to adulthood by say 17 while others might not make it till 19 or later. However legally it is 18. Period. That is what the law says.
Click to expand...

I have worked with people in their 50s who still act like children and young kids who are more responsible than their parents. It is completely subjective and relative to circumstance. Chronological age can serve as nothing more than a probability of maturity.
 
maquiscat said:
So as not to further derail this thread, I am moving the specific discussion.

When is adult hood? In actuality, I say that it varies with the individual. One person can grow to adulthood by say 17 while others might not make it till 19 or later. However legally it is 18. Period. That is what the law says.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to mental adulthood?

Physical adulthood is when the person enter puberty.
 
maquiscat said:
So as not to further derail this thread, I am moving the specific discussion.

When is adult hood? In actuality, I say that it varies with the individual. One person can grow to adulthood by say 17 while others might not make it till 19 or later. However legally it is 18. Period. That is what the law says.
Click to expand...

Well, what do you mean by "adult?"

If you asked me when I became an adult, I would give you about a dozen different metrics that I reached at different ages, and I'd give you a few more I don't think I've totally mastered yet, even as a fully independent 24-year-old.

This is what's so tricky about it. And I think using the law as a blind hammer can land someone with a sex offense when they've done nothing wrong. Two teens at the same high school, one recently legal and one not, for example. But I think there's ways to make it simpler.

If the two people involved are of similar ages -- within 3 years, I'd say -- then even if neither is an adult, neither should be treated as a pedophile or an adult criminal. They probably both lack the full breadth of rationality we associate with a fully developed brain.

The bigger the age gap, the bigger the problem, but it's NOT just about whether the victim is an adult or not.

It's about power differential. It's about the fact that as youths, we are HARDWIRED to be at least passively deferential to elders, in order to err on the side our own well-being. A young brain sort of knows it doesn't have all the tools yet, and will treat any significantly older person as a higher class (even if their only sign of that is trying to avoid punishment -- it still shows they consider the person powerful enough to punish them).

If you have a significantly older assailant, this power difference is a huge deal. Even if someone is reproductively mature, even if they might be capable of surviving completely on their own, their brain may still tell them to submit to this older person, such as in cases of teens with people in their 20's or 30's or above.

I think we focus on the wrong thing. When can a person consent? Well, that's an unanswerable question to my mind. However, it is crystal clear that any child is at a power disadvantage versus any adult. That is the real issue that victimizes children: the lack of power.
 
When one is ready to assume full responsibility for one's actions.

So, obviously, no typical Democrat could ever qualify, as does no one still on their parent's health insurance policy at 25.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Well, what do you mean by "adult?"

If you asked me when I became an adult, I would give you about a dozen different metrics that I reached at different ages, and I'd give you a few more I don't think I've totally mastered yet, even as a fully independent 24-year-old.

This is what's so tricky about it. And I think using the law as a blind hammer can land someone with a sex offense when they've done nothing wrong. Two teens at the same high school, one recently legal and one not, for example. But I think there's ways to make it simpler.

If the two people involved are of similar ages -- within 3 years, I'd say -- then even if neither is an adult, neither should be treated as a pedophile or an adult criminal. They probably both lack the full breadth of rationality we associate with a fully developed brain.

The bigger the age gap, the bigger the problem, but it's NOT just about whether the victim is an adult or not.

It's about power differential. It's about the fact that as youths, we are HARDWIRED to be at least passively deferential to elders, in order to err on the side our own well-being. A young brain sort of knows it doesn't have all the tools yet, and will treat any significantly older person as a higher class (even if their only sign of that is trying to avoid punishment -- it still shows they consider the person powerful enough to punish them).

If you have a significantly older assailant, this power difference is a huge deal. Even if someone is reproductively mature, even if they might be capable of surviving completely on their own, their brain may still tell them to submit to this older person, such as in cases of teens with people in their 20's or 30's or above.

I think we focus on the wrong thing. When can a person consent? Well, that's an unanswerable question to my mind. However, it is crystal clear that any child is at a power disadvantage versus any adult. That is the real issue that victimizes children: the lack of power.
Click to expand...

But does that power differential ever go away? Why can we say that 16 and 25 is bad while saying that 36 and 45 are is alright? Or even 36 and 65? Yeah the later will get social condemnation, but legally we say that it is really none of our business.

If the issue is that of the fully developed brain or social skills or whatever, why won't we account for the variations in reaching that point . We basically set an absolute hardline with no allowance for the possibility that, albeit rare, that one can be mature enough prior to that age to actually make such a decision. I don't have an issue with the idea that we set a marker and use that as the rule of thumb, evaluating only those cases that may be the exception. I just find it rather hypocritical that we can say that a person who is 17 years, 364 days old is too immature to choose to be with a 35 YO, yet someone who is 2 days older is.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Well, what do you mean by "adult?"

If you asked me when I became an adult, I would give you about a dozen different metrics that I reached at different ages, and I'd give you a few more I don't think I've totally mastered yet, even as a fully independent 24-year-old.

This is what's so tricky about it. And I think using the law as a blind hammer can land someone with a sex offense when they've done nothing wrong. Two teens at the same high school, one recently legal and one not, for example. But I think there's ways to make it simpler.

If the two people involved are of similar ages -- within 3 years, I'd say -- then even if neither is an adult, neither should be treated as a pedophile or an adult criminal. They probably both lack the full breadth of rationality we associate with a fully developed brain.

The bigger the age gap, the bigger the problem, but it's NOT just about whether the victim is an adult or not.

It's about power differential. It's about the fact that as youths, we are HARDWIRED to be at least passively deferential to elders, in order to err on the side our own well-being. A young brain sort of knows it doesn't have all the tools yet, and will treat any significantly older person as a higher class (even if their only sign of that is trying to avoid punishment -- it still shows they consider the person powerful enough to punish them).

If you have a significantly older assailant, this power difference is a huge deal. Even if someone is reproductively mature, even if they might be capable of surviving completely on their own, their brain may still tell them to submit to this older person, such as in cases of teens with people in their 20's or 30's or above.

I think we focus on the wrong thing. When can a person consent? Well, that's an unanswerable question to my mind. However, it is crystal clear that any child is at a power disadvantage versus any adult. That is the real issue that victimizes children: the lack of power.
Click to expand...
Why do you view sex as some kind of class struggle or conflict? You use words such as "assailant", "victim", "class" and "problem". That's just not right IMO.
 
Muhammed said:
Why do you view sex as some kind of class struggle or conflict? You use words such as "assailant", "victim", "class" and "problem". That's just not right IMO.
Click to expand...

Well, given the thread that was linked to in the OP, I am assuming the thrust of this thread is about pedophilia, consent, and rape. So...
 
maquiscat said:
But does that power differential ever go away? Why can we say that 16 and 25 is bad while saying that 36 and 45 are is alright? Or even 36 and 65? Yeah the later will get social condemnation, but legally we say that it is really none of our business.

If the issue is that of the fully developed brain or social skills or whatever, why won't we account for the variations in reaching that point . We basically set an absolute hardline with no allowance for the possibility that, albeit rare, that one can be mature enough prior to that age to actually make such a decision. I don't have an issue with the idea that we set a marker and use that as the rule of thumb, evaluating only those cases that may be the exception. I just find it rather hypocritical that we can say that a person who is 17 years, 364 days old is too immature to choose to be with a 35 YO, yet someone who is 2 days older is.
Click to expand...

Because 36 and 65 are both solidly adults, and that hardwiring that we have in childhood is long gone.

That isn't to say that a 35-year-old can't be in an abusive relationship, obviously, but the considerations aren't the same.
 
maquiscat said:
So as not to further derail this thread, I am moving the specific discussion.

When is adult hood? In actuality, I say that it varies with the individual. One person can grow to adulthood by say 17 while others might not make it till 19 or later. However legally it is 18. Period. That is what the law says.
Click to expand...
Maturity and adulthood are two different things, and I think that's what you're asking in a roundabout way.

For good or for bad, when managing large groups of people, attempting to micromanage according to each individual's maturity level would be literally impossible. Setting an arbitrary line is the best option, and 18 seems about right. Where we seem to fall off the boat lately as a society is in not expecting 18 year olds to be held accountable as adults like we used to.

Please note that I said "best", not perfect.


ttwtt78640 said:
That is a good question. There seems to be no single answer; 16 to marry/drive, 18 to vote/join military and 21 to drink alcohol.

It seems that for criminal treatment as an adult then it depends upon the serverity of the crime and the age of the victim/perp.
Click to expand...
When younger I never understood the graduated system of growing up, for lack of a better phrase, that you point out. Now that I'm older I see some sense to it. I think it's fine.

re drinking: I am good with a drinking age of 21, but favor allowing 18 yr olds in the military to also drink as long as it is on base (regardless what the local laws off base might be). I know it was that way when I served, but that was 30 years ago and I don't know if it is still that way, or not.

re criminal charges: I do believe in "adult crime, adult time". I wouldn't put a 14 yr old murderer in San Quentin, but I would be fine with sentencing them to 60 years and starting in a youth facility then transferring them to San Quentin when they're 20-ish yrs old to finish their full time.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Well, given the thread that was linked to in the OP, I am assuming the thrust of this thread is about pedophilia, consent, and rape. So...
Click to expand...

The inspiration of a topic need not be the limit of the topic. While issues of consent for sexual activity is what inspired this thread, the topic can continue on to other rights of adults, such as when one can drive, vote, drink, etc, as well as a discussion on whether or not to maintain a strict line or to allow for the potential variation of reaching adulthood outside the mean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom