Did US age-of-consent laws come about to 'police' female sexuality?

[Delta4Embassy]

Statutory rape laws and ages of consent in the U.S. - The Washington Post

"The ages of consent throughout the country were apparently 10 or 12 throughout much of the 1800s; they then rose to 16 or 18 by 1920, according to Mary Odem’s “Delinquent Daughters: Protecting and Policing Adolescent Female Sexuality in the United States, 1885-1920,” and there have been minor fluctuations since then. The last state to raise the age of consent from 14 to 16 was Hawaii, in 2001. Moreover, until recently the statutory rape laws applied only to girls, not to boys; heterosexual sex with an underage boy wasn’t statutory rape at all — now it is.
...
An age of consent of 16 may seem very low to you. If that’s so, you may be shocked to know that — according to the accounts I’ve seen (e.g., here) — it’s 13 in South Korea and Japan, and, until recently, Spain; 14 in Austria, Germany, Italy, and Portugal; 15 in Denmark, France, and Sweden; and 16 in most of the rest of the Western world. The age 17 and 18 states in the United States are outliers, though Ireland and a couple of states in Australia are also at 17."

Roaring 20s History of Human Sexuality in Western Culture

"On the left you have a woman from the early 1900s: her stlye is very conservative, Victorian-like, and covers most of her body. She carries herself in a more formal and disciplined manner. The picture on the right shows women from the 1920s. Their attire is much more revealing and flashy from their their individualized hats, their shorter, sleeveless dresses, down to their strap-on heals. They are expressing emotion, and their body language is less formal and more expressive. Although it appears that they are posing, it is in a way that shows an attitude that is embracing life and rebelling from the previous ideals of how women should carry themselves. This especially applies to their less conservative views about sex."

Could the more restrictive ages of consent to have sex have come about to control this new 'radical' sexuality in women, and not out of any particular concern for young women? Especially in light of the 'statutory rape laws only applied to females' it seems worth asking whether these laws were designed solely to control women (men being almost exclusively in political roles when they came about.)

 

[G.T.]

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Look at the consent laws in comparison to the child labor laws. It had nothing to do with protecting women, and everything to do with a growing realization that CHILDREN needed protections.

And you are a pervert. Is this all you ever think about?

 

[ChrisL]

Age of consent should be 18 across the board. This gives children a chance to be educated and to experience some independence and gain some knowledge. It is NOT right to marry or to have sex with an inexperienced child, unless you are ALSO an inexperienced and ignorant child.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Age of consent should be 18 across the board. This gives children a chance to be educated and to experience some independence and gain some knowledge. It is NOT right to marry or to have sex with an inexperienced child, unless you are ALSO an inexperienced and ignorant child.

It's a complicated issue. On the one hand you wanna protect youth from sexual exploitation, competition, and distractions during their educational years, reduce the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases, unwed teenaged pregnancies, and having higher AoC's accomplishes that.

On the other hand, sex is positive, healthy, natural, and something we're all hardwired to desire once puberty begins. So regardless of an AoC law, people are going to pursue sex anyway. Do you then want the increased costs of having to prosecute everyone simply acting on inbuilt biology? If we legalize needle exchange to reduce tax costs of medical issues involving dirty infected needles, can't the same arguement be made for lowering AoC to a lower age to cut costs associated with the higher age and prosecuting those offenders?

What might work in other countries and cultures doesn't necessarily translate into another. But having high AoC well above the 'more traditional' onset of puberty (say age 13) when teens are desiring sex, looking at porn, masturbating, and dressing more provoctatively, is punishing people for doing something natural and positive. In effect, making the very best expression of affection and fondness into the very worst by making it illegal.

When sexuality is repressed, human beings don't take up a hobby, they get violent. To themselves as well as to others. And while a neurotic sexually repressed society benefits the for-profit prison industry, law enforcement, lawyers and the courts, it's at the expense of people.
Plus it also costs tax payers more than when AoC are lower and prosecutions are fewer. How many people's lives are ruined, and even "victims" traumatized for doing something mutually desireable and pleasant once law is introduced? How does being told you were raped and taken advantage of affect your psyche and self-esteem when you're pretty sure you had a nice time doing something you wanted to do? How is being found guilty of raping a minor effect the "rapist" when he was a high school sweetheart who did nothing more than have sex on prom night with a classmate?

The existing AoC system is dysfunctional and in desparate need of modernization. Unfortunately, politicians are suject to the whims of their supporters and unlikely to step foward and propose so much as a ciritcal review of such things since they'd likely be voted out of office. Teenaged sexuality is more perilous than Social Security to politicians. So long as they're the ones obligated with making or changing laws, nothing's likely to get changed.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Age of consent should be 18 across the board. This gives children a chance to be educated and to experience some independence and gain some knowledge. It is NOT right to marry or to have sex with an inexperienced child, unless you are ALSO an inexperienced and ignorant child.

It's a complicated issue. On the one hand you wanna protect youth from sexual exploitation, competition, and distractions during their educational years, reduce the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases, unwed teenaged pregnancies, and having higher AoC's accomplishes that.

On the other hand, sex is positive, healthy, natural, and something we're all hardwired to desire once puberty begins. So regardless of an AoC law, people are going to pursue sex anyway. Do you then want the increased costs of having to prosecute everyone simply acting on inbuilt biology? If we legalize needle exchange to reduce tax costs of medical issues involving dirty infected needles, can't the same arguement be made for lowering AoC to a lower age to cut costs associated with the higher age and prosecuting those offenders?

What might work in other countries and cultures doesn't necessarily translate into another. But having high AoC well above the 'more traditional' onset of puberty (say age 13) when teens are desiring sex, looking at porn, masturbating, and dressing more provoctatively, is punishing people for doing something natural and positive. In effect, making the very best expression of affection and fondness into the very worst by making it illegal.

When sexuality is repressed, human beings don't take up a hobby, they get violent. To themselves as well as to others. And while a neurotic sexually repressed society benefits the for-profit prison industry, law enforcement, lawyers and the courts, it's at the expense of people.
Plus it also costs tax payers more than when AoC are lower and prosecutions are fewer. How many people's lives are ruined, and even "victims" traumatized for doing something mutually desireable and pleasant once law is introduced? How does being told you were raped and taken advantage of affect your psyche and self-esteem when you're pretty sure you had a nice time doing something you wanted to do? How is being found guilty of raping a minor effect the "rapist" when he was a high school sweetheart who did nothing more than have sex on prom night with a classmate?

The existing AoC system is dysfunctional and in desparate need of modernization. Unfortunately, politicians are suject to the whims of their supporters and unlikely to step foward and propose so much as a ciritcal review of such things since they'd likely be voted out of office. Teenaged sexuality is more perilous than Social Security to politicians. So long as they're the ones obligated with making or changing laws, nothing's likely to get changed.

Long story short, D4E would like to repeal the age of consent laws altogether. Big surprise there, pervert.

 

[ChrisL]

Age of consent should be 18 across the board. This gives children a chance to be educated and to experience some independence and gain some knowledge. It is NOT right to marry or to have sex with an inexperienced child, unless you are ALSO an inexperienced and ignorant child.

It's a complicated issue. On the one hand you wanna protect youth from sexual exploitation, competition, and distractions during their educational years, reduce the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases, unwed teenaged pregnancies, and having higher AoC's accomplishes that.

On the other hand, sex is positive, healthy, natural, and something we're all hardwired to desire once puberty begins. So regardless of an AoC law, people are going to pursue sex anyway. Do you then want the increased costs of having to prosecute everyone simply acting on inbuilt biology? If we legalize needle exchange to reduce tax costs of medical issues involving dirty infected needles, can't the same arguement be made for lowering AoC to a lower age to cut costs associated with the higher age and prosecuting those offenders?

What might work in other countries and cultures doesn't necessarily translate into another. But having high AoC well above the 'more traditional' onset of puberty (say age 13) when teens are desiring sex, looking at porn, masturbating, and dressing more provoctatively, is punishing people for doing something natural and positive. In effect, making the very best expression of affection and fondness into the very worst by making it illegal.

When sexuality is repressed, human beings don't take up a hobby, they get violent. To themselves as well as to others. And while a neurotic sexually repressed society benefits the for-profit prison industry, law enforcement, lawyers and the courts, it's at the expense of people.
Plus it also costs tax payers more than when AoC are lower and prosecutions are fewer. How many people's lives are ruined, and even "victims" traumatized for doing something mutually desireable and pleasant once law is introduced? How does being told you were raped and taken advantage of affect your psyche and self-esteem when you're pretty sure you had a nice time doing something you wanted to do? How is being found guilty of raping a minor effect the "rapist" when he was a high school sweetheart who did nothing more than have sex on prom night with a classmate?

The existing AoC system is dysfunctional and in desparate need of modernization. Unfortunately, politicians are suject to the whims of their supporters and unlikely to step foward and propose so much as a ciritcal review of such things since they'd likely be voted out of office. Teenaged sexuality is more perilous than Social Security to politicians. So long as they're the ones obligated with making or changing laws, nothing's likely to get changed.

I don't care. The age of consent should be 18, federally enforced (IOW, a felony) and with exceptions of Romeo and Juliet laws.

 

[ChrisL]

Age of consent should be 18 across the board. This gives children a chance to be educated and to experience some independence and gain some knowledge. It is NOT right to marry or to have sex with an inexperienced child, unless you are ALSO an inexperienced and ignorant child.

It's a complicated issue. On the one hand you wanna protect youth from sexual exploitation, competition, and distractions during their educational years, reduce the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases, unwed teenaged pregnancies, and having higher AoC's accomplishes that.

On the other hand, sex is positive, healthy, natural, and something we're all hardwired to desire once puberty begins. So regardless of an AoC law, people are going to pursue sex anyway. Do you then want the increased costs of having to prosecute everyone simply acting on inbuilt biology? If we legalize needle exchange to reduce tax costs of medical issues involving dirty infected needles, can't the same arguement be made for lowering AoC to a lower age to cut costs associated with the higher age and prosecuting those offenders?

What might work in other countries and cultures doesn't necessarily translate into another. But having high AoC well above the 'more traditional' onset of puberty (say age 13) when teens are desiring sex, looking at porn, masturbating, and dressing more provoctatively, is punishing people for doing something natural and positive. In effect, making the very best expression of affection and fondness into the very worst by making it illegal.

When sexuality is repressed, human beings don't take up a hobby, they get violent. To themselves as well as to others. And while a neurotic sexually repressed society benefits the for-profit prison industry, law enforcement, lawyers and the courts, it's at the expense of people.
Plus it also costs tax payers more than when AoC are lower and prosecutions are fewer. How many people's lives are ruined, and even "victims" traumatized for doing something mutually desireable and pleasant once law is introduced? How does being told you were raped and taken advantage of affect your psyche and self-esteem when you're pretty sure you had a nice time doing something you wanted to do? How is being found guilty of raping a minor effect the "rapist" when he was a high school sweetheart who did nothing more than have sex on prom night with a classmate?

The existing AoC system is dysfunctional and in desparate need of modernization. Unfortunately, politicians are suject to the whims of their supporters and unlikely to step foward and propose so much as a ciritcal review of such things since they'd likely be voted out of office. Teenaged sexuality is more perilous than Social Security to politicians. So long as they're the ones obligated with making or changing laws, nothing's likely to get changed.

An age of consent is NOT repressing people sexually. It protects young people from predatory adults. MOST 15 or 16-year-old girls don't know what the hell is going on anyways!

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Look at the consent laws in comparison to the child labor laws. It had nothing to do with protecting women, and everything to do with a growing realization that CHILDREN needed protections.

And you are a pervert. Is this all you ever think about?

No, but promoting planetary defense against asteroids makes people roll their eyes so I have other interests.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Age of consent should be 18 across the board. This gives children a chance to be educated and to experience some independence and gain some knowledge. It is NOT right to marry or to have sex with an inexperienced child, unless you are ALSO an inexperienced and ignorant child.

It's a complicated issue. On the one hand you wanna protect youth from sexual exploitation, competition, and distractions during their educational years, reduce the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases, unwed teenaged pregnancies, and having higher AoC's accomplishes that.

On the other hand, sex is positive, healthy, natural, and something we're all hardwired to desire once puberty begins. So regardless of an AoC law, people are going to pursue sex anyway. Do you then want the increased costs of having to prosecute everyone simply acting on inbuilt biology? If we legalize needle exchange to reduce tax costs of medical issues involving dirty infected needles, can't the same arguement be made for lowering AoC to a lower age to cut costs associated with the higher age and prosecuting those offenders?

What might work in other countries and cultures doesn't necessarily translate into another. But having high AoC well above the 'more traditional' onset of puberty (say age 13) when teens are desiring sex, looking at porn, masturbating, and dressing more provoctatively, is punishing people for doing something natural and positive. In effect, making the very best expression of affection and fondness into the very worst by making it illegal.

When sexuality is repressed, human beings don't take up a hobby, they get violent. To themselves as well as to others. And while a neurotic sexually repressed society benefits the for-profit prison industry, law enforcement, lawyers and the courts, it's at the expense of people.
Plus it also costs tax payers more than when AoC are lower and prosecutions are fewer. How many people's lives are ruined, and even "victims" traumatized for doing something mutually desireable and pleasant once law is introduced? How does being told you were raped and taken advantage of affect your psyche and self-esteem when you're pretty sure you had a nice time doing something you wanted to do? How is being found guilty of raping a minor effect the "rapist" when he was a high school sweetheart who did nothing more than have sex on prom night with a classmate?

The existing AoC system is dysfunctional and in desparate need of modernization. Unfortunately, politicians are suject to the whims of their supporters and unlikely to step foward and propose so much as a ciritcal review of such things since they'd likely be voted out of office. Teenaged sexuality is more perilous than Social Security to politicians. So long as they're the ones obligated with making or changing laws, nothing's likely to get changed.

An age of consent is NOT repressing people sexually. It protects young people from predatory adults. MOST 15 or 16-year-old girls don't know what the hell is going on anyways!

Actually, studies have shown that when teens are polled about their sexual knowledge by adults, they feign ignorance.

 

[ChrisL]

Age of consent should be 18 across the board. This gives children a chance to be educated and to experience some independence and gain some knowledge. It is NOT right to marry or to have sex with an inexperienced child, unless you are ALSO an inexperienced and ignorant child.

It's a complicated issue. On the one hand you wanna protect youth from sexual exploitation, competition, and distractions during their educational years, reduce the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases, unwed teenaged pregnancies, and having higher AoC's accomplishes that.

On the other hand, sex is positive, healthy, natural, and something we're all hardwired to desire once puberty begins. So regardless of an AoC law, people are going to pursue sex anyway. Do you then want the increased costs of having to prosecute everyone simply acting on inbuilt biology? If we legalize needle exchange to reduce tax costs of medical issues involving dirty infected needles, can't the same arguement be made for lowering AoC to a lower age to cut costs associated with the higher age and prosecuting those offenders?

What might work in other countries and cultures doesn't necessarily translate into another. But having high AoC well above the 'more traditional' onset of puberty (say age 13) when teens are desiring sex, looking at porn, masturbating, and dressing more provoctatively, is punishing people for doing something natural and positive. In effect, making the very best expression of affection and fondness into the very worst by making it illegal.

When sexuality is repressed, human beings don't take up a hobby, they get violent. To themselves as well as to others. And while a neurotic sexually repressed society benefits the for-profit prison industry, law enforcement, lawyers and the courts, it's at the expense of people.
Plus it also costs tax payers more than when AoC are lower and prosecutions are fewer. How many people's lives are ruined, and even "victims" traumatized for doing something mutually desireable and pleasant once law is introduced? How does being told you were raped and taken advantage of affect your psyche and self-esteem when you're pretty sure you had a nice time doing something you wanted to do? How is being found guilty of raping a minor effect the "rapist" when he was a high school sweetheart who did nothing more than have sex on prom night with a classmate?

The existing AoC system is dysfunctional and in desparate need of modernization. Unfortunately, politicians are suject to the whims of their supporters and unlikely to step foward and propose so much as a ciritcal review of such things since they'd likely be voted out of office. Teenaged sexuality is more perilous than Social Security to politicians. So long as they're the ones obligated with making or changing laws, nothing's likely to get changed.

An age of consent is NOT repressing people sexually. It protects young people from predatory adults. MOST 15 or 16-year-old girls don't know what the hell is going on anyways!

Actually, studies have shown that when teens are polled about their sexual knowledge by adults, they feign ignorance.

Just because you know sexual positions, etc., does not make you knowledgeable or responsible. It certainly doesn't mean you know what you're getting yourself into. Now, since I actually WAS a 15-year-old girl, so I think I have a lot more experience and knowledge in this subject matter.

 

[ChrisL]

Look at the consent laws in comparison to the child labor laws. It had nothing to do with protecting women, and everything to do with a growing realization that CHILDREN needed protections.

And you are a pervert. Is this all you ever think about?

No, but promoting planetary defense against asteroids makes people roll their eyes so I have other interests.

You need to stop thinking about little girls in that way, I know that much. MOST little girls that age have sex to please their boyfriends or to keep them and NOT because they really want to or are ready to have an intimate sexual relationship.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Look at the consent laws in comparison to the child labor laws. It had nothing to do with protecting women, and everything to do with a growing realization that CHILDREN needed protections.

And you are a pervert. Is this all you ever think about?

No, but promoting planetary defense against asteroids makes people roll their eyes so I have other interests.

You need to stop thinking about little girls in that way, I know that much. MOST little girls that age have sex to please their boyfriends or to keep them and NOT because they really want to or are ready to have an intimate sexual relationship.

I used to be a 'little boy' and as I recall wanted sex rather a lot. I masturbated to climax, and when the time came I could have sex with someone did, enjoyed it, and climaxed then as well.

Our age of consent laws do not address the reality of sexual preparedness. Law's the law, but laws can and do change for various reasons. These laws should change.

 

[ChrisL]

Look at the consent laws in comparison to the child labor laws. It had nothing to do with protecting women, and everything to do with a growing realization that CHILDREN needed protections.

And you are a pervert. Is this all you ever think about?

No, but promoting planetary defense against asteroids makes people roll their eyes so I have other interests.

You need to stop thinking about little girls in that way, I know that much. MOST little girls that age have sex to please their boyfriends or to keep them and NOT because they really want to or are ready to have an intimate sexual relationship.

I used to be a 'little boy' and as I recall wanted sex rather a lot. I masturbated to climax, and when the time came I could have sex with someone did, enjoyed it, and climaxed then as well.

Our age of consent laws do not address the reality of sexual preparedness. Law's the law, but laws can and do change for various reasons. These laws should change.

Masturbating and enjoying sex does not mean anything. Duh! Obviously you know nothing about sexuality.

Children that age are NOT prepared for an adult intimate relationship. They don't have the mental or emotional capacity for such a relationship. They are immature and cannot handle the responsibilities that go along with such a relationship. They also cannot handle the disappointments that go along with such relationships because . . . they are STILL children!!

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Look at the consent laws in comparison to the child labor laws. It had nothing to do with protecting women, and everything to do with a growing realization that CHILDREN needed protections.

And you are a pervert. Is this all you ever think about?

No, but promoting planetary defense against asteroids makes people roll their eyes so I have other interests.

You need to stop thinking about little girls in that way, I know that much. MOST little girls that age have sex to please their boyfriends or to keep them and NOT because they really want to or are ready to have an intimate sexual relationship.

I used to be a 'little boy' and as I recall wanted sex rather a lot. I masturbated to climax, and when the time came I could have sex with someone did, enjoyed it, and climaxed then as well.

Our age of consent laws do not address the reality of sexual preparedness. Law's the law, but laws can and do change for various reasons. These laws should change.

Masturbating and enjoying sex does not mean anything. Duh! Obviously you know nothing about sexuality.

Children that age are NOT prepared for an adult intimate relationship. They don't have the mental or emotional capacity for such a relationship. They are immature and cannot handle the responsibilities that go along with such a relationship. They also cannot handle the disappointments that go along with such relationships because . . . they are STILL children!!

Feel like I should take a ss and post this somewhere like people do for stupid tweets.

 

[ChrisL]

Also, sexual relationships come with CONSEQUENCES, which children are also not prepared to handle.

 

[ChrisL]

Look at the consent laws in comparison to the child labor laws. It had nothing to do with protecting women, and everything to do with a growing realization that CHILDREN needed protections.

And you are a pervert. Is this all you ever think about?

No, but promoting planetary defense against asteroids makes people roll their eyes so I have other interests.

You need to stop thinking about little girls in that way, I know that much. MOST little girls that age have sex to please their boyfriends or to keep them and NOT because they really want to or are ready to have an intimate sexual relationship.

I used to be a 'little boy' and as I recall wanted sex rather a lot. I masturbated to climax, and when the time came I could have sex with someone did, enjoyed it, and climaxed then as well.

Our age of consent laws do not address the reality of sexual preparedness. Law's the law, but laws can and do change for various reasons. These laws should change.

Masturbating and enjoying sex does not mean anything. Duh! Obviously you know nothing about sexuality.

Children that age are NOT prepared for an adult intimate relationship. They don't have the mental or emotional capacity for such a relationship. They are immature and cannot handle the responsibilities that go along with such a relationship. They also cannot handle the disappointments that go along with such relationships because . . . they are STILL children!!

Feel like I should take a ss and post this somewhere like people do for stupid tweets.

It's true. As a former 15-year-old girl, I can attest to that.

 

[aaronleland]

No, but promoting planetary defense against asteroids makes people roll their eyes so I have other interests.

You need to stop thinking about little girls in that way, I know that much. MOST little girls that age have sex to please their boyfriends or to keep them and NOT because they really want to or are ready to have an intimate sexual relationship.

I used to be a 'little boy' and as I recall wanted sex rather a lot. I masturbated to climax, and when the time came I could have sex with someone did, enjoyed it, and climaxed then as well.

Our age of consent laws do not address the reality of sexual preparedness. Law's the law, but laws can and do change for various reasons. These laws should change.

Masturbating and enjoying sex does not mean anything. Duh! Obviously you know nothing about sexuality.

Children that age are NOT prepared for an adult intimate relationship. They don't have the mental or emotional capacity for such a relationship. They are immature and cannot handle the responsibilities that go along with such a relationship. They also cannot handle the disappointments that go along with such relationships because . . . they are STILL children!!

Feel like I should take a ss and post this somewhere like people do for stupid tweets.

It's true. As a former 15-year-old girl, I can attest to that.

He's masturbating now...

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

You need to stop thinking about little girls in that way, I know that much. MOST little girls that age have sex to please their boyfriends or to keep them and NOT because they really want to or are ready to have an intimate sexual relationship.

I used to be a 'little boy' and as I recall wanted sex rather a lot. I masturbated to climax, and when the time came I could have sex with someone did, enjoyed it, and climaxed then as well.

Our age of consent laws do not address the reality of sexual preparedness. Law's the law, but laws can and do change for various reasons. These laws should change.

Masturbating and enjoying sex does not mean anything. Duh! Obviously you know nothing about sexuality.

Children that age are NOT prepared for an adult intimate relationship. They don't have the mental or emotional capacity for such a relationship. They are immature and cannot handle the responsibilities that go along with such a relationship. They also cannot handle the disappointments that go along with such relationships because . . . they are STILL children!!

Feel like I should take a ss and post this somewhere like people do for stupid tweets.

It's true. As a former 15-year-old girl, I can attest to that.

He's masturbating now...

That explains the tweezers

 

[ChrisL]

You need to stop thinking about little girls in that way, I know that much. MOST little girls that age have sex to please their boyfriends or to keep them and NOT because they really want to or are ready to have an intimate sexual relationship.

I used to be a 'little boy' and as I recall wanted sex rather a lot. I masturbated to climax, and when the time came I could have sex with someone did, enjoyed it, and climaxed then as well.

Our age of consent laws do not address the reality of sexual preparedness. Law's the law, but laws can and do change for various reasons. These laws should change.

Masturbating and enjoying sex does not mean anything. Duh! Obviously you know nothing about sexuality.

Children that age are NOT prepared for an adult intimate relationship. They don't have the mental or emotional capacity for such a relationship. They are immature and cannot handle the responsibilities that go along with such a relationship. They also cannot handle the disappointments that go along with such relationships because . . . they are STILL children!!

Feel like I should take a ss and post this somewhere like people do for stupid tweets.

It's true. As a former 15-year-old girl, I can attest to that.

He's masturbating now...

Since there is no disgusting button, I chose funny.