Age of Consent discussion on ontd_p. This can only end badly.
Ugh. Why does it seem like every single discussion of age of consent on ontd_p (oh, who am I kidding? In the world) has to devolve into discussions of Freshmen in college and high schoolers? The post in question was about a three or four decade age difference, not a few months. It is completely fucking irrelevant.
Also, why the fuck does that always seem to be followed with "omg why are college kids even hanging out with high schoolers?! That's only okay in X, Y, and Z conditions!" No. Fuck you. I have friends in high school because I still have a lot in common with them and I still enjoy their company and we still run in pretty much the same social circles, just as we have done for the last seven years. I don't think it's weird, they don't think it's weird, and those of their parents that I know don't think it's weird. There is no reason for it to be weird unless you're the worst sort of elitist college kid who thinks it's totally cool to talk down to anyone a few months younger than yourself. Shove your opinions up your ass, it's my social life. It also has no fucking place in a discussion about the age of consent because, shocker, it's possible to be friends with someone without having sex with them. The conditions under which it is okay to have sex with someone are vastly different from the conditions under which it is okay to be someone's friend. That's why it is completely legally and morally justifiable for you to sue your boss for asking you to give him a blowjob, but not for asking you to go golfing with him this weekend. Why the fuck does _p always want to blend these very different things?
Using education as a stand in for maturity is all kinds of fucked up and bigoted anyway. I was 17 when I got my associate degree but I knew 19-year-olds who were still in high school. It would not have somehow been more okay for a 22-year-old college student to have sex with me than it would have been for a 22-year-old college student to have sex with the 19-year-old. There are lots of reasons why a legal adult might still be in high school and lots of reasons why a minor might be in college, and none of them really have anything to do with sexual, emotional, or even mental maturity. Also, where the fuck does this even leave people who dropped out or choose never to go to college? Would it have been okay for a 50-year-old man to have sex with my 15-year-old friend who dropped out of high school to get her GED, work, and take care of her sick father, but not for that same 50-year-old man (Who never ages because ~magic~, okay?) to have sex with me because I'm just a 20-year-old undergrad and our lives are too ~different~? Seriously, education is a really shitty way to try to categorize adolescent experience and development, full-stop.
I also don't really like the idea that someone can be over the age of consent and still not "really" be able to consent to sex with people who are a certain number of years older than they are. Discussions about whether or not people between the ages of 18 and 25 can have truly consensual sex with 60-year-olds are worthwhile and I certainly won't shut them down, but let's be perfectly clear about what you are actually suggesting here. If you want close-in-age clauses to be enforced on people under the age of 25, you think the age of consent should be 25. Again, I think that discussion is worthwhile (though I'll admit I'm not fond of the idea of my Adulthood being revoked), but either 18-year-olds are sexually autonomous being capable of consenting to sex, period, (other than in circumstances where the consent would be compromised for anyone of any age, such as in situations with obvious power-imbalances) or they aren't. And if they aren't, our society really needs to reform its entire way of looking at adolescent sexuality. (Okay, we need to do that anyway, but in this hypothetical situation the reforms would need to be even more radical.)
Also, why the fuck does that always seem to be followed with "omg why are college kids even hanging out with high schoolers?! That's only okay in X, Y, and Z conditions!" No. Fuck you. I have friends in high school because I still have a lot in common with them and I still enjoy their company and we still run in pretty much the same social circles, just as we have done for the last seven years. I don't think it's weird, they don't think it's weird, and those of their parents that I know don't think it's weird. There is no reason for it to be weird unless you're the worst sort of elitist college kid who thinks it's totally cool to talk down to anyone a few months younger than yourself. Shove your opinions up your ass, it's my social life. It also has no fucking place in a discussion about the age of consent because, shocker, it's possible to be friends with someone without having sex with them. The conditions under which it is okay to have sex with someone are vastly different from the conditions under which it is okay to be someone's friend. That's why it is completely legally and morally justifiable for you to sue your boss for asking you to give him a blowjob, but not for asking you to go golfing with him this weekend. Why the fuck does _p always want to blend these very different things?
Using education as a stand in for maturity is all kinds of fucked up and bigoted anyway. I was 17 when I got my associate degree but I knew 19-year-olds who were still in high school. It would not have somehow been more okay for a 22-year-old college student to have sex with me than it would have been for a 22-year-old college student to have sex with the 19-year-old. There are lots of reasons why a legal adult might still be in high school and lots of reasons why a minor might be in college, and none of them really have anything to do with sexual, emotional, or even mental maturity. Also, where the fuck does this even leave people who dropped out or choose never to go to college? Would it have been okay for a 50-year-old man to have sex with my 15-year-old friend who dropped out of high school to get her GED, work, and take care of her sick father, but not for that same 50-year-old man (Who never ages because ~magic~, okay?) to have sex with me because I'm just a 20-year-old undergrad and our lives are too ~different~? Seriously, education is a really shitty way to try to categorize adolescent experience and development, full-stop.
I also don't really like the idea that someone can be over the age of consent and still not "really" be able to consent to sex with people who are a certain number of years older than they are. Discussions about whether or not people between the ages of 18 and 25 can have truly consensual sex with 60-year-olds are worthwhile and I certainly won't shut them down, but let's be perfectly clear about what you are actually suggesting here. If you want close-in-age clauses to be enforced on people under the age of 25, you think the age of consent should be 25. Again, I think that discussion is worthwhile (though I'll admit I'm not fond of the idea of my Adulthood being revoked), but either 18-year-olds are sexually autonomous being capable of consenting to sex, period, (other than in circumstances where the consent would be compromised for anyone of any age, such as in situations with obvious power-imbalances) or they aren't. And if they aren't, our society really needs to reform its entire way of looking at adolescent sexuality. (Okay, we need to do that anyway, but in this hypothetical situation the reforms would need to be even more radical.)