I've read that channel 4 is about to start a series campaigning for the age of consent to be 14. I am outraged at this to say the least. At 14, a CHILD is not ready for sex, certainly not with fully grown adults. Grown men will be able to exploit young girls even more than they do now, and in my opinion, commit paedophilia. On top of this, whereas now men try to claim that a girl of 14 - 15 looks 16, it could well be that a 12 - 13 year old looks 14. Where will it end? We already have enough abductions and rapes of children, lowering the age of consent will simply afford them less protection. Thats my opinion anyway.

My parents would have KILLED me if id have had sex at 14 and with good reason. You should be concentrating on school work at that age not going around having sex. Theres no need for it and its a dangerous thing to promote. Sex is getting more and more dangerous these days what with all the STIs around so if more people think its OK to do it, thats more people to harbour the diseases being passed around. Theres also pregnancy. I know people who got pregnant before finishing their GCSES and surprise surprise they didnt sit any so didnt get any qualifications even though some could have passed all of them if theyd have tried. What brilliant mothers theyll be to their babies. What kind of message is this sending to the poor little buggers.

OMG! Thats ridiculous! If anything it should be raised in my opinion! Some people I know at age 18 aren't very responsible so to lower the age of consent would just be stupid. *shakes head*

I totally agree Caprice - needs to be raised not lowered !!!!

I agree with being raised also!
I think 21 down the line. 21 Vote, Drink, Sex and Drive!

I'd go with it been raised also. I am not sure most people at 16 are capable of looking after a child which could well be the end result of a sexual encounter. I'd like to see it raised to 18 for sex and 21 for booze.

And in the real world that we live in people, sadly girls under the age of 14 are having sex.. I think the age of consent should be 18 but it will never stop underage sex..

were will it end channel four want the age of consent to be 14 then it will be 12 :x

Sickening it is.... you see girls wandering in town who are clearly babies themselves and pushing a pram. I'm not saying all teenage girls are the same - thankfully most aren't, however it amazes me why they get into that situation. I dont agree with all this crap about " Sometimes it cant be helped" of course it can - DONT HAVE SEX !!!! I reckon raising it to 18 is about right.

i think it should be left as it is

What a ridiculous suggestion, children at fourteen years of age are not ready for sexual intercourse. They have not fully developed either physically or mentally to be able to cope with the deep emotions which are involved.

Apart from the obvious dangers of disease, they should have lots more education and study, until they are mature enough to fully understand the risks which are ever present, in the problems of growing up in a hostile uncaring world.

Originally posted by halevan
They have not fully developed either physically or mentally to be able to cope with the deep emotions which are involved.

I totally agree !!

[Edited by Tony Ruscoe - fixed formatting]

Where did you read this t020? It seems unreal that Channel 4 would back something as crazy as this.

What is the age of consent in France? I heard it was 14?! In my opinion most people at 16 aren't even ready for sex, i was glad i waited till 18 :)

The Telegraph

Channel 4 is to examine whether the age of consent should be lowered to 14 in a series of programmes devoted to teenage sex, it said yesterday.

The Adult At 14 season will offer a "realistic examination of teenage sexuality" in a succession of programmes highlighting the increasingly sexualised world in which children grow up.

In one episode, Age Of Consent, the presenter, Miranda Sawyer, argues that sex below the age of 16 should be legalised.

Another documentary, Porn To Be Young, will interview young people about their attitude towards pornography, while in 14 Alone, a group of 10 14-year-old boys and girls will be allowed to spend five days and nights together in a house without adult supervision, television or computer games.

This is a follow-up to Boys Alone and the subsequent Girls Alone, a televised social experiment that attracted criticism for putting a group of 11-year-olds in a house to fend for themselves.

The programme claims it will offer an insight into "this tender age when children are on the cusp of adulthood".

A Channel 4 spokesman stressed that rules would be imposed and a camera crew would be present at all times to ensure things did not get out of hand. "This is not like Big Brother where they are left completely alone. There will be cameramen in the house with them," she said.

Although the season focuses on the subject of teenage sexuality, sex will be banned in the house.

Channel 4 will also screen Pleasureland, a feature-length drama set in Liverpool about the pressures on teenagers to have sex before the age of 16.

The channel, which has been criticised in the past for packing its schedules with supposedly serious-minded programmes about sex, will also broadcast Pornography: The Musical, an assortment of sex workers singing about their lives.

Away from sex, Channel 4's new autumn season heavily indulges another human obsession, with seven different series about the property market and people moving home.

As long as advertisers and women's magazines use waif like models to sell their products then it's going to appear acceptable to be sexually aware at an ever younger age. Look at any of the fashion mags and they all seem to be promoting child-like looks as fashionable. Men see this and think it's OK to have sex with ever younger girls if the mags portray them as adults and the girls try to emulate them, the waifs not the men. Not sure if that made sense but ...

I can't see a problem with a program investigating anything, they're not promoting it are they?

xxxxxxxxxxx

Does anyone know what the age of consent is in countries like Finaldn and Italy for example? Because I do believe they are something like 14 yrs.

This subject is way close to home for me due to circumstances which occured a few months ago now with my step daughter. I do not think that she was sensible or mature enough to deal with what she has done.

In addition I am not in a position to go mouthing off about girls having sex under age because I have been there done it, have no regrets nor problems then or now. Perhaps I am one of the lucky few who was able to deal with it all.

Something else that may have escaped some peoples attention is that it is only today's society that wrongly or rightly looks down upon girls as young as 12 having sex. It was common place for girls as young as that to get married and have children.

I cannot comment on whether this adversely affected their mental or emotional state, but they were socially accepted as being able to do this - and it is perhaps only social conditioning of todays teenagers that makes them unable to deal with it all.

I think that generally today's soceity like to protect children lest they loose their childhood - which appears to be a modern invention - Thank Queen Vic!

I don't think I can really take a stand either way. I will bring my kids up to cope with situations I believe they may face as any other parent would.

Moon

I am with moon maiden on this, every word she says.

To quote that oft used phrase in the smacking debate "It never did me any harm" either but that is not to say that it might not hurt others.

Personally, I think it is more a question of how old the person is that is having sex with a young person.

Two 14yr olds, or two 15yr olds happily exploring together doesnt seem so scary or inappropriate as a 30 year old bloke (or woman) and a 14 year old girl (or boy)

Now I know you cant legislate for that - the age differential, but I would be more worried about youngsters being persuaded into doing things they didnt want to by the worldy-wise than a few youthful indiscretions between teenagers. I expect we all would.

I think my vote would go for 16 though on balance

Let's be honest here... there are 14 year olds out there having sex with each other anyway and it's not doing anyone any real harm - so why bother lowering the legal age?

I remember reading somethign about the age of consent in another euro country (cannot remember which one)

Which stated that if both parties were under 16 and they both consented then it was not illegal. However if one of them was ovre 16 then they must wait whilst the younger hit 16 too.

Moon

Right there with you, Louise.
Young people will explore their sexuality - no amount of legislation can or should stop that. Where it gets scary is the intervention, as you say, of older men and women.
Sexuality was never a taboo subject in my household, and as a result of the openness of my family I did not feel desperate to go out immediately and find out what it was all about, but I did feel prepared for the situation when I was ready, and knew how to be safe. (i'll not discuss the mental scarring caused in teenage years by that very propensity for open conversation - some things you just don't want to share with your parents:lol: )
What is needed is APPROPRIATE education - i.e. open, accessible, from various points of view, absolutely truthful...and more of it.
Lowering and raising the age limit would only cloud an issue that needs people to think clearly about it for a change.

BTW, did anyone actually watch the documentary on Channel 4 (called "Adult at 14" or something).

If you actually did, you'd realise why the person narrating the documentary (can't remember her name) wants to lower the age of consent to 12! (Yes - twelve!)

The reason was that some people in the government were wanting to change the law to make it illegal to "do anything" (including kissing) under the age of 16. This would mean that if two 15 year olds kissed in public and got prosecuted, they would be added to the child sex offenders register. Ridiculous, obviously.

The important thing to remember is "consent". Just because you lower the age to 12 doesn't mean it's right for anyone to take advantage of anyone else.

Originally posted by maxamus
it should be lowered to 14 but it has to be totally safe untill the age of 16. In France thats what happens there and there isnt as much teenage pregnanceies because its a reasonable law

Do you have proof of this? or any information about it? I am curious to hear more

There are different and lower ages of concsent in many parts of Europe - I seem to remember Italy having an age of consent at 14 with certain stipulations attached.

I don't think lowering the age of consent in this country would help the teenage pregnances - it is just a simple demonstration of how teenagers are not willing to take responsibilitiy for their actions.

Education is key here not a free for all.

Also not ALL women can take the pill - every female on my husbands side of the family could never take the pill because of complications with cancer and blood pressure.
The pill is by no means the quick fix solution.

Moon

Just to set the record straight I haven't got 2 accounts and I'm not 15. Big sigh.

The original max.:D

Originally posted by maxamus
hi

i want all u people that r against to know that it is a single persons choice to make the desion to have sex. i think it should be lowered to the age of 14 but it must be safe


Remember that the taxpayer will, probably by the sounds of your background, have to foot the bill for any offsprings that your 'partner(s)' give birth to, and also fund any treatment for all of the STDs you will have and spread.

Originally posted by Belle
Do you have proof of this? or any information about it? I am curious to hear more
Don't need to know much other than nowhere in northern europe has a teenage preganancy rate anywhere near the uk rate

The UK has the highest number of teenage pregnancies in Western Europe and the highest number of unmarried teenage mothers in the world.
source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1999/04/99/teen_pregnancy/319869.stm)

Thank you Phan, I am well aware of the problems of underage sex, unwanted pregnancies and STDs. I am occasionally involved in promoting safe sex and condoms etc and support the work of the drop-in centres around Sheffield that promote contraception and education for young people.

This message is directed to all, not to Phan who I feel sure will agree with the majority of what I have to say.

I was curious to hear of something that sounded rather bizarre to me, and I am fairly sure cannot be stood up. That would be the idea that there is a law in France that says it is okay to have sex underage as long as you dont get pregnant.

When I was at school there were rumours of kids using cling film for a condom. I shudder, really, at the ignorance and the fallout, but that doesnt mean it doesnt happen.

It is silly to think that we can put an age down for legal consensual sex and expect kids to follow it without exception.

I much prefer that we concentrate, despite what Sidla said about smoking in another thread, on education and making sure that young people do not any longer believe that

a. you cant get pregnant standing up
b. you cant pregnant the first time
c. you cant get pregnant unless there is full intercourse etc etc

I want young people to have full and total and easy access to the facts in the hope that if they insist on having sex anyway, they at least know the risks.

I also want to make sure that they understand all about STDs and how you can get them even with a condom, depending on what it is.

Crabs for instance are no respectors of condoms.

Sorry to be so detailed.

I want them to know that as well as possibly falling pregnant years before they would want to, they might also catch an STD that will make sure they never can get pregnant by rendering them infertile.

Those that think that by setting an age and preaching "just say no" will actually make a difference must be living in cloud cuckoo land, I was young once and I remember exactly how it was.

We MUST fight all attempts to restrict knowledge, for as we all know and must realise, knowledge is power

And here endeth today's lesson

Since sex education was introduced, teen pregnancies have increased. How long before the lefties see that it simply doesn't work, and should be left to the parents, as and when they feel it appropriate? School sex education tells 11 year olds all about what sex is, using condoms, etc etc, and then come the end of the lesson, "now thats how you do it kids, but don't do it". Like thats going to work. Time to once again leave sex education to the parents and not the school.

t020, please can you stop using this 'lefties' term. Apart from that I am in agreement.

Originally posted by Sidla
t020, please can you stop using this 'lefties' term. Apart from that I am in agreement.

Bleeding heart liberals? Do gooders?

Originally posted by t020
Since sex education was introduced, teen pregnancies have increased. How long before the lefties see that it simply doesn't work, and should be left to the parents, as and when they feel it appropriate? School sex education tells 11 year olds all about what sex is, using condoms, etc etc, and then come the end of the lesson, "now thats how you do it kids, but don't do it". Like thats going to work. Time to once again leave sex education to the parents and not the school.

I dont agree that teen pregnancies have increased as a result of sex education. I dont believe there is enough sex education to start with and what there is, is often given by nervous and embarassed teachers who havent been given proper training and live in dread of that term coming around again each year.

Sex education has gone down hill in my view.

This is where we probably agree.

I am sure that some teachers are great at the education, and lots might come on to say so, but I am equally sure that faced with teenagers and raging hormones, many are petrified of delivering the whole topic.

31 years ago, at the age of 7, I was given my first sex education lesson in a regular county primary school. I recall that thereafter I was left in absolutely no doubt how babies were made, indeed we even saw a film of a baby being born. So far as I know none of the children who attended that class with me went on to have underage pregnancies and indeed I would go so far as to say that we were much more clued in to what it was all about and how important it was that we DIDNT have sex before we were grown-ups, that we were possibly almost too reluctant to experiment at all.

In fact, as a 38 year old, I can also say that a good half of the girls I was at that school with are even yet without children. If anything they went the other way.

I believe I am right in saying that the real evil has not been too much sex education but rather a back lash in the 1980s and possibly later, that fought to restrict education and led to the children I subsequently went to school with in a different authority with different rules, using bloody cling film!

Why do we continue to be scared of telling the truth? Most teenage pregnancies are caused through ignorance, through believing myths and through young people fighting back against those adults that insist on telling them what they are not allowed to do without explaining it all properly.

Sidla, the main reason you smoked was because people told you not to, and just "put their foot down" not because they told you the facts about cancer or about getting smelly breath, dirty fingers, ugly kisses and wasting tons of cash. I bet no-one ever spelt it out to you, showed you photos of diseased organs, or film clips of dying young people with cancer. They just said "NO" and you said "I WILL then"

That is how it is with sex, if you dont properly explain the pitfalls as well as the facts, and just say NO then that is a red rag to a bull where teenagers are concerned.

Neither of you are more than a few years older than teenagers yourselves, cant you remember how it was?

Re all education falling into the hands of children, may I ask who educates the children of parents who were themselves underaged, if we leave it to parents? And who ducates the children of shy parents or deeply religious parents who also want their kids to stay in the dark? And who educates children in care?

When you are hot and sweaty and panting together in an empty house while supposedly babysitting your little sister, and your parents or your teachers have not educated you, but merely told you what not to do, and your hormomes are raging and it all feels so nice, then what is going to stop you?

It wouldnt be fear of an unwanted pregnancy or a damaging STD, not if you didnt know the first thing about either

I wonder if there is a gender gap on this issue, I would be interested to learn if it is men who are against sex education and women who are for it. After all, it is women who principally pay the price in terms of pregnancy and fertility problems in later life for thoughtless actions in their teens.

A fascinating debate, thanks for setting it up

I still maintain that it is not the age that matters so much as the awareness of risk and the degree of common sense that the youngsters possess.

Originally posted by t020
Bleeding heart liberals? Do gooders?


So Tories dont believe in sex education then?

Does that mean that the rise in teenage pregnancies is a direct correlation to 18 years of Tory rule then?

At last we have the answer

......petards?



:thumbsup:

Originally posted by Belle
So Tories dont believe in sex education then?

Does that mean that the rise in teenage pregnancies is a direct correlation to 18 years of Tory rule then?

At last we have the answer

......petards?



:thumbsup:

I never brought political parties into it. The fact is, teachers are often wishy washy liberals, and schools are run by do-gooder governors. The rise in teenage pregnancies coincides with a rise in sex education in school. 'You do the math'.

Originally posted by Belle
Sidla, the main reason you smoked was because people told you not to, and just "put their foot down" not because they told you the facts about cancer or about getting smelly breath, dirty fingers, ugly kisses and wasting tons of cash. I bet no-one ever spelt it out to you, showed you photos of diseased organs, or film clips of dying young people with cancer. They just said "NO" and you said "I WILL then"
I'm not going to tell you the real reason I started smoking, but actually the reason I started was far stupider than this. I knew it was not a clever thing to do, and I also knew all the risks and didn't intend to keep smoking for the amount of time that I have. But I am a person who has made some really stupid decisions in the past. In a way I'm pleased by this because I've learnt not to take rash decisions and think about things a bit more.

dsnt peter tatchell the gay rights guy want to lower it to 12

Originally posted by t020
Since sex education was introduced, teen pregnancies have increased. How long before the lefties see that it simply doesn't work, and should be left to the parents, as and when they feel it appropriate? School sex education tells 11 year olds all about what sex is, using condoms, etc etc, and then come the end of the lesson, "now thats how you do it kids, but don't do it". Like thats going to work. Time to once again leave sex education to the parents and not the school.

Sources?

If you are talking about the last 20 years, then there has halso been a decrease in the age at which kids hit puberty, presumably this is also due to 'leftie' sex education

Originally posted by t020
The fact is, teachers are often wishy washy liberals, and schools are run by do-gooder governors. The rise in teenage pregnancies coincides with a rise in sex education in school. 'You do the math'.

t020 you really are getting tiresome with your facts. How many times do you have to be told that facts need to be backed up with your source. What are you learning at Uni? Do they not teach you proper methods?

The fact is teachers are often wishy washy, give me strength.

Originally posted by t020
How long before the lefties see that it simply doesn't work, and should be left to the parents, as and when they feel it appropriate?

Originally posted by t020
I never brought political parties into it.

Yeah right

Some of us are still just about out of our dotage enough to be able to read

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
Sources?

If you are talking about the last 20 years, then there has halso been a decrease in the age at which kids hit puberty, presumably this is also due to 'leftie' sex education

Quite simply, yes. If kids learn about sex earlier they will get those hormones racing earlier.*


*May not actually be true

Originally posted by t020
Quite simply, yes. If kids learn about sex earlier they will get those hormones racing earlier.*


*Is not actually be true
The fact is that biologically speaking, children in developed western countries such as this one are experiencing a gradual reduction in the age of their sexual maturity.

The average age at which girls reached menarche has slowly reduced from something like 17 in 1890 to 13 in 1985.

Now these changes impose certain biological imperatives, which if left untrammelled are likely to lead to further teenage preganancies and transmission of STDs. Education needs to happen earlier and to be of the right quality.

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
The fact is that biologically speaking, children in developed western countries such as this one are experiencing a gradual reduction in the age of their sexual maturity.

The average age at which girls reached menarche has slowly reduced from something like 17 in 1890 to 13 in 1985.

Now these changes impose certain biological imperatives, which if left untrammelled are likely to lead to further teenage preganancies and transmission of STDs. Education needs to happen earlier and to be of the right quality.

But could it be the fact that western kids are exposed to and 'educated' about sex from a much earlier age, and thus their biological systems kick in earlier? From your figures, it would suggest that there is a link. Sex was a taboo in 1890, much like it is still in many non-western countries, especially Islamic ones. Today in the west, however, sex is on show everywhere you look, and taught about in schools, so no wonder kids are developing earlier than they should.

:rolleyes: age 14 the girls/boys should be out taking cars and joyriding not having sex ;)

Originally posted by t020
But could it be the fact that western kids are exposed to and 'educated' about sex from a much earlier age, and thus their biological systems kick in earlier? From your figures, it would suggest that there is a link. Sex was a taboo in 1890, much like it is still in many non-western countries, especially Islamic ones. Today in the west, however, sex is on show everywhere you look, and taught about in schools, so no wonder kids are developing earlier than they should.

<stifled laughter>
no.
:)
That's a nice try but a little far fetched. Correlation does not mean a causal link.

It is most likely to be related to diet and general improved health.

However, some signs of puberty are appearing in children much younger than 13, and there is a suspicion that this may be due to the amount of excess oestrogen in the environment.

but an ingenious thought nevertheless (books stimulating gonadotrophins in children *chortle*)

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
<stifled laughter>
no.
:)
That's a nice try but a little far fetched. Correlation does not mean a causal link.

It is most likely to be related to diet and general improved health.

However, some signs of puberty are appearing in children much younger than 13, and there is a suspicion that this may be due to the amount of excess oestrogen in the environment.

but an ingenious thought nevertheless (books stimulating gonadotrophins in children *chortle*)

Surely an improvement in health means a longer life expectancy, so one would think this would mean puberty starting later, not earlier, were it to occur at X% through ones life.

Originally posted by t020
Surely an improvement in health means a longer life expectancy, so one would think this would mean puberty starting later, not earlier, were it to occur at X% through ones life.

For that particular theory to work, the body would have to know the precise date of its death in order to trigger the onset of puberty at the correct time. Unlikely in any event.

The data suggests that particularly improved nutrition is responsible for the gradual fall in age.

If you consider that hormones often contain signature trace elements such as iodine, then dietary defeciencies would clearly lead to a hormone defecit and hence a slowed onset of puberty.

google around see what you find. most sources tend to agree on improved nutrition.

Originally posted by huwj
The UK has the highest rate of teenage pregnancies in Europe, and one of the highest ages of consent!! Lowering the age of consent alone will have very little affect - those 14 year olds who want to have sex will do so regardless of whether it is legal or not but the fact that most parents & teachers are horrified by the thought will mean that teenagers are less likely to discuss it with adults or to find out about the real risks involved.

I had almost no sex education at school, which is a joke. Teenage sex is a huge Taboo and until we start talking to kids at a young age about sex then attitudes of teenagers & adults will not change. We need to have a more open attitude. Telling 16yr olds to use condoms and using scare tactics with figures about STI's will not help. We need to be informing them from a young age about the good and the bad points to sex.

To tackle the real issues here, I think we need to follow the lead of countries like the Netherlands & France - if part of that involves lowering the age of consent then I'm all for it.

So true.. If you keep in mind also in mainland Europe, children also drink from a young age at home with a meal.

Seen as a part of life, not a taboo, and do not tend to fall about on the streets like we so often see over here.

It is about our attitudes and approach of dealing with these issues. Blame the `media` blame the government, blame...

We live in such a rich country with such freedom of choice yet we are given 100 hundred reasons why doing anything is bad with no solid explanation. RANT RANT!!! RANT

Blow me, I am 30 and have not stopped rebelling yet.

Dont forget. Being a kid is hard, we all know that!

Age restriction NO! People break the law every day.

Education starts at home. No solutions!

Surely we need to protect children from predatory adults though? We can't just have a paedophilic free for all.

Originally posted by t020
Surely we need to protect children from predatory adults though? We can't just have a paedophilic free for all.
Something like 85% of paedophillia is committed in the family environment - and tht's still (largely) illegal.

Sorry mum. but

with breing 14 yr old boy full of it all and stuff im not really bothered about the law. they dont even enforce it well!!

its all about if you think your ready if you do you do if you dont you dont,. and anyway it takes two doesnt it????

and if your stupid enough not to protect yourself and catch summat its your fault so hey leave em to it.

fletch



THIS IS MY 100th POST WOOOOO and wht a subject!!!

Most kids in my school do alcohol, drugs as a daily thing and they have 18yr law, they even do drugs and smoke stuff in the school toilets!! nobody cares!! ive seen 12 yr olds smoking sort that out aswell!! even i think thats bad!!