- Joined
- Feb 16, 2010
- Messages
- 44,019
- Reaction score
- 29,303
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
It does, and it always will. :shrug:
Women can either plan around this reality and be safe, or they can ignore it and put themselves at risk.
Did I ever say that it did?
No means no. If a man breaks the law, he should go to jail.
Thank you. You have avoided saying that for several posts. The environment a woman puts herself in has more to do with her safety than what she wears. And even if she puts herself in an unsafe environment, the man who assaults her is to blame for the assault.
What more to it than that really is there?
Nothing.
Do European nations have any more of a problem with this than we do even with lower ages of consent?
Having brought Europe into the conversation, you would have more of an idea than I.
I disagree that the "self-control and personal responsibility" to which you allude here is even necessarily desirable under all circumstances in the first place.
Whoa, what? What circumstance is self-control and personal responsibility not desirable?
A 20, 21, 22, or 23 year old wants to date a 16 year old (and vice versa). So what? Why does that matter?
On an objective basis, it's really not that big deal so long as the relationship is consensual and non-abusive. In the past, such relationships were common place.
In many (rather civilized) parts of the world, they still are common today.
Because she is not a fully developed adult. Arcana even suggested that though AoC is lower in parts of Europe, there is an age limitation of 3 years in difference as well. I also said that they don't treat their teenagers like children, but at least in this area, we seem to agree.
A man beyond the legal difference, can wait. Be a man. What is wrong with being a man and doing the right thing? Because of opinions like this, I welcome laws that protect young girls, even from themselves. This is why there is a line in the sand as far as when a person become fully responsible for their own actions. Why a man should have a pass when it comes to sexual relationships, is baffling.
Which you have not demonstrated that having the law set strictly at age 18 even does.
Huh? At 18, a girl is responsible for herself and for the mistakes she might make with regard to older men. I cannot logically argue against that principle if I'm going to argue that a man has to be responsible for himself with regard to having sex with too young girl.
It can certainly be a contributing factor in the circumstances leading up to her assault. Trying to deny this basic fact is tantamount to blatant delusion.
There are some legitimately bad men out there. Going out of one's way to draw their attention generally isn't a good idea.
I addressed this above.
Again, I question your premise that such "restraint" is even necessary in all cases anyway.
Most of the rest of the world seems to get on just fine without it.
And again, I question what exactly you mean by that. In what case should a man, or woman, not be held personally responsible for not having sex with underaged persons?