If they both consent and they use protection, who's it hurting? Though if one party is like 15 and the other 30 something, then I am a little bit sceptical about them getting together. Merely because the younger individual may not understand what they're getting in to and the older person may be manipulating them.
But how easily could your 30-year-old self have outwitted your 16-year-old self? That, I suspect, is more to Ratdog's point. But he can speak for himself.
Also, aren't these laws for people who don't know what they're doing? By that I mean that it doesn't get reported as a crime unless the participants are either unwilling, incautious in protecting their privacy (so that someone else reports them), or unprepared for the possible consequences that cannot be concealed (in the case of disease and/or pregnancy).
Typically, the other sort of objection I hear to the age-based sexual assault laws is from adults who are considering having sex with minors and are worried about their legal exposure. They tend to be terrified of the "Douglas Fairbanks scenario", wherein there was consensual sex between an adult and a minor, but then the minor turned the adult in to the authorities. I think it's reasonable for adults to have that pause to consider what they're doing. Is there trust there? Is there a relationship there? If you're afraid or uncertain of what your partner might do after you have sex, you probably should refrain. Of course, that applies regardless of the age of the participants.
What I find interesting in your question, Cinders, is that the question is not exactly answerable, because the laws from state to state in the USA are all very different, as well as different from country to country. So the only way to answer the question as asked is to take the stance of either: "No type of sexual activity with a minor is acceptable" (that covers all "the laws" as not strict enough) or "The concept of minor is meaningless and should be abolished." (in which case "the laws" are all too strict). Too, the definition of actionable sexual activity varies from location to location, so in that way "the laws" can't be said to be too severe or too lax.
I recommend that the continued discussion mention specific laws, so it's clear what we're discussing. For instance, I was interested to read that in California it is a worse offense for a 12-year-old to have sex with a 16-year-old than for a 20-year-old to have sex with a 16-year-old. Apparently there's a problem with preteen Lotharios propositioning the high schools kids in the Golden State.
Edit: I just corrected the grammar of my sentence describing the Douglas Fairbanks scenario. Previously, it had read that the minor somehow waved a wand and - poof! - turned the adult into the authorities, rather than turning the adult in to the authorities. Heh.
I'm a little surprised that there hasn't been more debate - let alone discussion - on this subject. Perhaps it's too broad after all. Cinders, would you like to call out a particular law for consideration?
15 in Sweden is about where I myself would draw the age line.
It appears that quite a lot of US states draw the line at around 16 now.
I feel it should be the minor who brings charges, though... NOT the parents. And I saw a slew of cases where it was indeed the outraged parent, and they go their way.
In one case (that I cannot legally give particulars on) it was a 16 yr old girl and 18 yr old male. The parents did not like him and filed Statutory Rape charges on him. He now has a record for a sexual offense that will never go away, even though the two are now married.
I can't honestly say that I'm all that farmilar with these laws, but I do think the law needs to be drawn somewhere. Yes, in many cases it may not be hurting anyone, but the law is there to protect people.
Besides, shouldn't we only be having sex if we're in love? And, if these people are in love, why would waiting a few years be that big of a deal?
I think that, for the most part, it's an important laws that are in place to protect the (majority) or young, naive people.
I think some of these laws are also used because a "normal" 16 year old may know what they're getting into, but then there are people with mental problems that can get pushed into these situations without understanding what's happening.
Oh...i just looked at the table, they've changed the law where i live, lol, i thought it was always female/16 and male/18 (or something like that)
I'm honestly quite alarmed by the ages of some in the USA being 14 (condition of a small age gap...like that matters)
All of this can also bring up a recent case, not so much of anyone getting into trouble, but Jamie Lynn Spears, she was 16 and already pregnant and it wasn't a planned baby so shows some people don't know what they could be getting into (yes this happens with older people too, i know)
I'm sorry - but stupid children fall under the Parents jurisdiction. Creating a criminal out of the father is ridiculous, unless the girl was raped (and my definition of rape is very very broad...)
It is not the Government's or Judicial Systems job to parent kids.
i agree with most of what you have said lori but i think most kids would not come forward with something like this especially if they don't want their family and friend to know
Debs. They have the right to report for actual Rape.
Statutory rape laws do not involve force or coersion - it makes it a illegal for the over 18 boy to have sex with a willing 15 (or whatever) girl, and if the parents push it he ends up with a Sexual Predator conviction on his record for the rest of his life, even if he & the girl later get married.
