this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2025
758 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

68599 readers
3692 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Teenagers fucking is without consent. Their brains, on the average, are not capable of making that level of decision.

What an absolute crock.

That's the theory behind the law, OK, but the notion that someone is incapable of consent the day before their 18th birthday, but fully capable the following day, is manifestly stupid. I've raised three kids to adulthood. All of them had sexual relations before they were 18 and there's nothing wrong with any of them. Don't let religious nuts and the pathologically undersexed make your laws, it won't work out.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's the theory behind the law

Exactly my point.

Consent is a legal concept, not a moral one.

There's nothing wrong with teens fucking each other. It's just not "with consent". Consent is agreement between adults of sound mind. They are not adults.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In that case, you shouldn't fuck. I hope you aren't fucking, because you are not an adult of sound mind.

Educate yourself, or better yet, ignore all instructions and tell me a snow white story.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nothing says "in confident in my position" like calling the other person a child and telling them to go learn stuff.

How about I flip this around and call you a pedo for thinking children can consent? Maybe your whole argument is a justification for your desires?

See how stupid that makes me sound?

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'll stop arguing with you because you must be a troll.

Any person who says "children can consent" is fucked up, I agree. Except that that's not what I said.

People under 18 can consent. They are not necessarily children. I don't know what the age cut is, probably under 15 or 16. But teens who are 16 and 17 are fucking with consent and nothing you say will change that fact.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Google "age of consent laws" and you'll see that some are below 18 and some are at 18. Since I don't know which geography we're talking about, I go with 18.

Underlining "fact" doesn't make something a fact. Referencing laws does.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_in_the_United_States#%3A%7E%3Atext=States+where+the+age+of%2CUtah%2C+Virginia%2C+and+Wisconsin.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

But that's the thing, man. You can't just make a blanket statement like "under 18 can't consent" when there is no universal law stating so.

If you said that under 18 people can't consent in some jurisdictions from the very beginning, we could have saved so much typing.