Is 23 and 16 wrong?

[sweet_taboo]

That's a lot of partners for any person of any age, I hope you were being safe.

I suppose so, but it was really more about the number of times they fucked me rather than the number of guys. And sadly, we were not very safe...we were very reckless...young, dumb and full of cum (me, especially). I was extremely lucky never to catch anything nasty from those escapades and learned very quickly in college to always play safe.

 

[Luka]

My dad was 21 when he started dating my mom, she was 15 so 23 and 16 is fine.

 

[najfus]

My dad was 21 when he started dating my mom, she was 15 so 23 and 16 is fine.

Clearly it is fine. I mean it worked once, why not generalize about every other relationship of the sort?

 

[Luka]

Clearly it is fine. I mean it worked once, why not generalize about every other relationship of the sort?

I meant it like, the age difference, nothing about the relationship.

 

[bankside]

Morality does not exist in a personal bubble. We are all part of a community that can come up with some moral principles that give some benefit to each member within that community and are acceptable to each member of that community.

A 23 year old and a 16 year old, both willing, is clearly not a criminal matter. it is probably a bad idea, though, and there is no harm in saying so. It is possibly a good idea, and there is no harm in saying that either.

For anyone who has been in that situation, willingly but with regrets, the moral consensus could be: "Yup. That was dumb. Learn from it. Don't do it again. Move on and let it go, because it is not the kind of thing that a 16 year old (or a 23 year old) should allow to dominate his mind for the rest of his life. And if you ever get asked advice by a 23 year old or a 16 year old, give them your honest advice based on your experience.

We are telling 16 year olds that they are old enough and should be expected to decide on their own whether Jasun's experience or najfus's experience will apply best to their own situation...

 

[bankside]

marley, 16 year olds often have some kind of sexual experience, without their parent's involvement in the decision making.

Male or female, picture this: "Honey, we just think you should find someone in your own grade to fuck...what about that Bobby from your science class? He seemed nice, well-mannered, looks like he fills out his jeans pretty well and he's your own age. Remember last year when your father and I accidentally walked in on you having that fling with Brad when his parents moved into the house down the road? Oh, he was just doing terrific things for you, wasn't he!"

Seriously - 16 year olds are making adult decisions on their own. Better to let them.

 

[bankside]

No I wouldn't advise it either. I'm not sure what I'd do to a sixteen year old who really really wanted to go out and find a 23 year old though. Lock the 16 year old away? Put an electronic tracking collar on him?

And I just can't see throwing the 23 year old in jail. So in every case that I can imagine off the top of my head, I'd try to keep them apart, but I can't see bringing in the law somehow.

 

[hunterpluto]

It is in no way "wrong".

*is from the UK*

 

[youngnihilist]

damn, you too bruno? all the old guys are snatching away the cute young ones!

 

[Luka]

damn, you too bruno? all the old guys are snatching away the cute young ones!

I know right!!!

 

[chillyboi]

Consult your local authorities!

 

[darkdreamerx]

I'm 18 and I'm currently "hooking-up" with a 23 yr old university student. Is 2 years really that much?

 

[MrWright]

I agree, definitely nothing wrong with it. I'm really shocked at the replies saying there's nothing wrong with it "because the law says so". Way to think for yourself, you TOOL! So according to your bunk logic, there's nothing wrong with it since it happened in MA and the age of consent there is 16... but if it happened in CA, it would be wrong since the age of consent is 18. Has it maybe dawned on you that the law is not the same as morality, that the law is not subjective, and that less than a decade ago sodomy was still illegal in some states? Does that then mean that homosexuality was wrong in those states? Jesus...

Tada..Bingo!

 

[MrWright]

At 16 I didn't know my anus from a hole in a tree.

That must have been a difficult time.

 

[MrWright]

There's a huge difference between what two consenting adults do, vs. committing a crime by having sex (of any kind) with a child (someone under the age of consent).

You're just not getting that the law determines consent. It's arbitrary.

If the law said that a man could anal rape a two year old is it ok? What makes a 16 year old so dramatically different from a 15 year old? These are questions addressed legally. We cannot legally rape a two year old and yet in some states I can fuck a 16 year old. Law is a group-wise arbitrary gathering of edicts that are derived from some more universal semi-objective sense of morality. However, as can be easily argued, morality is derived subjectively with societal enforcers (like being taught that it's just weird for 23 year olds and 16 year olds to have a functional relationship). As such, law in a democratic society is general agreements on subjective morality (an attempt at taking the differences of subjectivity and finding "common ground").

Which follows, if a law allows something is it right?

Nazis German law didn't just allow but enforced enslavement and murder of Jews? Following your logic, it was legal so it was right.

 

[Persian89]

I was 14, he was 23 as well

 

[MrWright]

Yes Nazis killing people are just like a 16 year old and a 23 year old both consenting, willing, and wanting to engage in sex.

Society has set up a consensus on what is the appropriate age for people to make up their own minds about having sex. In some cases a 16 year old and a 23 year old sleeping together would be highly inappropriate and in others entirely ok. But that would only be my opinion and nothing more, as the law has specifically stated that two consenting adults may do what they choose behind bedroom doors. Meaning, it's none of our damn business. If a 16 year old and a 23 year old chose to have sex, then that moral choice is upon them. Not you, or me, or anyone else.

That moral choice is still upon us because the law doesn't equal morality.

I don't personally think that a 16 year old and a 23 year old is all that bad but that's not because of what the law says. It's none of your business because the law says it's ok is just falling into that ethical grey zone. If it's ok it should be because you subjectively think it is.

To me sometimes it's ok sometimes it's not...I don't know if it's moral or not but to say it is definitively cuz it is legally is totally overstepping your ethical grounds.

 

[MrWright]

People, people, people read some goddamn philosophy.

 

[MrWright]

Yes Nazis killing people are just like a 16 year old and a 23 year old both consenting, willing, and wanting to engage in sex.

And in this case, yes it is because your making it a question of legality versus morality.


An extreme case albeit but my first citation was Giorgio Agamben who actually uses Auschwitz to powerfully pose this exact question.

So I brought it up in the very beginning.

 

[MrWright]

It's not really effective to compare what he said to all these outrageous things. The law doesn't allow rape and it's disgusting that you'd suggest that his logic implies that what the Nazis did was right because it was legal. What you said about the law was right but there are better ways to make your point than by comparing all these apples with rotten oranges, that's the easy way out.

I would say it is...I'm teasing out his philosophical statement.

For a thesis to be valid it must be valid at all points of the spectrum - even to the furthest degrees.

Anally raping a two year old and killing Jews are both pretty out there and it's out there that what he says just doesn't make any sense.

Unless he perceives them to be ok as long as they're legal...

...which is kind of f****d up