If it was up to you to set a new age of consent, what would the age be and why?

[backdoorjimmy]

This is a tough question because I think 18 is way too old but I don't really know where to draw the line. I started having sex when I was 13 with a kid who was a year older than me. It felt comfortable and even safe because we had a connection that I couldn't describe outside of the sex and attraction. A few months later I hooked up with a 16 year old guy and felt nervous, a little scared and vulnerable. I enjoyed the hookup but was so intimidated that I decided not to go out of my way to see him again.

On the other hand when I was 15-16, I was hooking up with guys that were 18-20 and felt perfectly safe and comfortable. I can't put my finger on the moment that it happened for me, but there was a point where it felt like I was hooking up with a peer rather than a bigger, older guy. I purposely avoided trying to hook up with way older men in their 30's and 40's until I was 18, but that was only because I didn't want to screw them over legally if someone found out. I felt completely ready for it at 15, but knew it was a bad idea for the person I would be having sex with.

I'd say 15 or 16 is a good age of consent.

[MattQueen1]

The biggest problem with consent law, like many laws, is that they are one size fits all. I have known young people who are both mature and knowledgeable to consent to sex and I have known adults who are too stupid to know anything about it. The problems are that MOST, the overwhelming, are not and how can you stop an adult from doing stupid things. 

[funpozbottom]

15 minutes ago, MattQueen1 said:

The biggest problem with consent law, like many laws, is that they are one size fits all. I have known young people who are both mature and knowledgeable to consent to sex and I have known adults who are too stupid to know anything about it. The problems are that MOST, the overwhelming, are not and how can you stop an adult from doing stupid things. 

Consent laws are supposed to protect the younger person but they don't account for varying maturity levels and don't protect against bullying by older teens. Rather than a set age, there probably should be a sliding scale based on the age of the younger person that becomes more flexible as a person gets older until he reaches 18.  So, for example, say the scale starts at age 13 and the formula is:  2 times age - 12 = max age of partner. (I'm not saying this is the best formula -- I'm merely using it as an example because it's relatively easy math.)  If you follow the formula, at 13, you could have sex with a 14 yo, at 14, a 16 yo, at 15, an 18yo, at 16, a 20yo, and at 17, a 22yo.  Some sort of sliding age scale would still maintain some restrictions to address the issue of predators while allowing more freedom to explore and reducing the chance of being caught in the 18th birthday trap. It also accounts for maturity because, if you're not mature enough to work out the formula, then you're not mature enough to have sex. 😉

[Faggotuser]

I would eliminate it altogether. Some faggots are born cumdumps and know they belong on their hands and knees sucking cocks and getting fucked as soon as they know what it is to serve cock and submit to men. The best whores have a deep hunger for cock and cum.

[Piggyybttmm]

13 seems like a perfect age to me. At that age I already knew what I wanted and that I was already hooking up with older guys in my neighborhood. Most people know about sex from young and know what they want from young

[Guest Cumslutfinland]

I was 14 when i started sucking dick and taking it up my ass. And everyone i fucked was over 40 and i loved it

[steve-tmq]

On 11/3/2010 at 12:19 AM, fairlygay said:

I said 18. The key word was sex with adults. Kids experiment with one another all the time and that's fine if they have sex with each other during the early teen-age years but wait until 18 before dabbing with adults.

I think this is a very good idea, make it OK for kids to play about if there both kids.

[CumBustion]

This is a slippery slope. It’s one thing to be younger and have a trustworthy daddy that has the son’s safety in mind. A nurturing relationship, focused on sexual exploration in a healthy way for a curious teen would be ideal. 
 

On the other end, there are some real predators out there. They know how to disguise sexual exploitation and pimping as friendship and love. I fell into this category. I was seven years away from turning 21 when I met “daddy.” I thought his “lessons” to teach me to become a better lover was to make him happy, to include having me experience other, older, men. Turns out his “friends” were possibly pedos paying him to have sex with me, to include pics and vids of the acts. 

[SFSloppyAznBottom]

Personally, I started randomly hooking up when I was 14. Not regretting it, but there are a few situations that I didn't know better.

 I made more conscious, informed decisions when I was 16, so I vouch for 16.

[Guest 0000]

14

[Guest sydbtm]

I 100% agree with the “no age of consent but tougher punishment for under 18 rape” option. Where I live there are a lot of younger teen guys on Grindr who obviously know what want or at least are curious about learning - the law should allow them to explore and enjoy their sexuality without anyone getting in trouble for it as long as it’s consensual.

[BootmanLA]

54 minutes ago, sydbtm said:

I 100% agree with the “no age of consent but tougher punishment for under 18 rape” option. Where I live there are a lot of younger teen guys on Grindr who obviously know what want or at least are curious about learning - the law should allow them to explore and enjoy their sexuality without anyone getting in trouble for it as long as it’s consensual.

But that's the problem: the notion, under the law at least, is that until judgment is developed to a certain point, "consent" is meaningless. An adult can convince a teen to do or try almost anything, from sex to pot to meth to heroin, and as long as "consent" is obtained, predators can go free.

Say you had a 40 year old man who had a nice, clear recording on his phone of a 10-year old boy answering the question "Do you want me to put my cock in your ass?" with "Yes". That's consent. It's also meaningless, especially if the boy was groomed to want that. And since there's consent, by definition it's not rape, so you can't charge for that.

Our current age of consent laws may be screwed up in various respects, depending on what they are, but junking them entirely is a bad, bad idea.

[FillMyRear]

Im fine with 18 but age of consent varies depending on the state. Reason for me thinking 18 is good they graduate and are more likely to know what they want when it comes to sex. Plus besides the legal stuff that can come with it the underage shit doesn't sit well with me.

[kinkysuBB]

We have a slightly complicated law here, which I’ve looked up because I got tied up in knots trying to remember it. The TL/DR version is the age of consent is 17, with some limited exceptions, and I think that’s about right. 16 or 18 would sit easily with me either as those are the legal ages for most other things here (smoking, voting, drinking, making decisions about your medical care etc.) 17 is the legal age for driving.

Basically the exceptions are for people under 17 having sex with other people under 17, so long as they’re both roughly the same age.

I was a virgin (in terms of penetrative sex) until I was 20 and it hasn’t stopped me doing anything I want sexually, and a lot of it.

[Guest sydbtm]

On 11/1/2020 at 11:59 AM, BootmanLA said:

But that's the problem: the notion, under the law at least, is that until judgment is developed to a certain point, "consent" is meaningless. An adult can convince a teen to do or try almost anything, from sex to pot to meth to heroin, and as long as "consent" is obtained, predators can go free.

Say you had a 40 year old man who had a nice, clear recording on his phone of a 10-year old boy answering the question "Do you want me to put my cock in your ass?" with "Yes". That's consent. It's also meaningless, especially if the boy was groomed to want that. And since there's consent, by definition it's not rape, so you can't charge for that.

Our current age of consent laws may be screwed up in various respects, depending on what they are, but junking them entirely is a bad, bad idea.

That’s not really the sort of thing I was talking about because I don’t imagine any 10 year olds are on Grindr. But its already possible to prove coercion and non-consent between adults - there’s no reason the same couldn’t be done for a man and a boy.

All I’m saying is remove the automatic classification of rape just because one of the participants was a certain age. A 40 year old having sex with a 10 year old might be rape or grooming, but that isn’t a certainty. Some boys are curious and eager to explore sex at that age - there’s no reason they shouldn’t be allowed to if they want to, and as long as the man is slow and gentle there’s no reason it can’t be a good experience for both of them.