Why does Ireland have the highest age of consent in the EU?

Albert X

It is crazy that an 18 year old male can go to prison for having sex with an 16 year old girl. The average age of consent in the rest of Europe is 14.

Legs.Eleven

Albert X wrote: »

It is crazy that an 18 year old male can go to prison for having sex with an 16 year old girl. The average age of consent in the rest of Europe is 14.

It's 17. You're right about the rest of your post though.

Henlars67

We are a nation with a high percentage of prudes and conservative catholic morons.

In my opinion the age of consent should be 15. 17 is definitely way too high.

WilyCoyote

Because most of the politicians have enormous sexual hang ups
except

when they're having affairs.

suicide_circus

are the majority of 14 year olds ready for the emotional and possible practical consequences of sex?

stimpson

suicide_circus wrote: »

are the majority of 14 year olds ready for the emotional and possible practical consequences of sex?

Like going to jail?

Legs.Eleven

Henlars67 wrote: »

We are a nation with a high percentage of prudes and conservative catholic morons.

In my opinion the age of consent should be 15. 17 is definitely way too high.

Why is it too high? Do you think because the law says 17 people wait? Me arse.


The one thing that does need to change is the law relating to statutory rape though and the fact that it only applies to males. That really needs to change.

suicide_circus

stimpson wrote: »

Like going to jail?

like a baby

floggg

suicide_circus wrote: »

are the majority of 14 year olds ready for the emotional and possible practical consequences of sex?

Ready or not, they are doing it.

I don't think two kids (or worse, only the boy) should be criminalised for having sex. I think if two people of similar age want to do it, they will and criminalisation won't go anything but ruin the boys life if one of their parents finds out and reacts badly.

Now I don't think an 18 or 19 year old should get a pass for sex with a 14 year old, but if they are of a similar age then I say leave em alone.

stimpson

suicide_circus wrote: »

like a baby

Do you think that's a worse consequence?

Renegade Mechanic

suicide_circus wrote: »

are the majority of 14 year olds ready for the emotional and possible practical consequences of sex?

The majority of 20 year olds arent ready for the emotional and possible practical consequences of sex..

To answer the OQ, im not sure. The churches previous iron grip definitely factors in, I think.

Teyla Emmagan

suicide_circus wrote: »

are the majority of 14 year olds ready for the emotional and possible practical consequences of sex?

No, most of them certainly aren't. A lot of 14 year olds are still kids. It's a huge step to take and they just don't have the emotional maturity at that age. If the age of consent was lowered you'd just have more and more kids being pressured into having sex. You can spend your whole adult life having sex, you don't have to start when you're still a kid. It should be 17 for both sexes.

Renegade Mechanic

stimpson wrote: »

Do you think that's a worse consequence?

For the baby. Few people are fit to raise a child properly anymore and Im not ashamed to say Im not one of them.

elfy4eva

17 is a fair age IMO.

billymitchell

Albert X wrote: »

It is crazy that an 18 year old male can go to prison for having sex with an 16 year old girl. The average age of consent in the rest of Europe is 14.

Is she hot and worth a few years in jail for? I'd say risk it

stimpson

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

For the baby. Few people are fit to raise a child properly anymore and Im not ashamed to say Im not one of them.

Sending kids to jail for doing what comes naturally is hardly an appropriate response.

Dravokivich

stimpson wrote: »

Do you think that's a worse consequence?

They never said worse. They said emotional and practical, as in able to take care of and be responsible for a baby.

OP, you looking to get stuck into someone younger?

Legs.Eleven

The age of consent in Spain is 13, which means it's completely legal for a man or woman of any age to sleep with a 13-year-old. That doesn't sit right with me at all.

Mr Benevolent

stimpson wrote: »

Sending kids to jail for doing what comes naturally is hardly an appropriate response.

A lot of uncivilised things come naturally too. That's why there are laws.

titan18

suicide_circus wrote: »

are the majority of 14 year olds ready for the emotional and possible practical consequences of sex?

Dunno, other countries seem to think so though, and get on fine. Don't really see it as some magical age where one day they can't, and then the next day they've suddenly grown up and are ready. Some are, some aren't, as long as it's not someone much older taking advantage of them, it should be up to themselves making a good decision

GalwayGuy2

The age of consent in Spain is 13, which means it's completely legal for a man or woman of any age to sleep with a 13-year-old. That doesn't sit right with me at all.

Yeah I don't agree with that. Denmark is 15 and Sweden is 16, and yet it seems to be a blanket age of consent. To be honest, there should be a minimum age to be to consent to anybody above that age.

mike65

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

The age of consent in Spain is 13, which means it's completely legal for a man or woman of any age to sleep with a 13-year-old. That doesn't sit right with me at all.

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Yeah I don't agree with that. Denmark is 15 and Sweden is 16, and yet it seems to be a blanket age of consent. To be honest, there should be a minimum age to be to consent to anybody above that age.

Does it happen much though I wonder? Or is the law merely reflecting reality rather than pious hope in those countries?

Renegade Mechanic

stimpson wrote: »

Sending kids to jail for doing what comes naturally is hardly an appropriate response.

What comes naturally? We are not animals. Though it is a bit pointless to tell them to show restraint when its all they see around them. And Im sorry but if youre old enough to be hit by the law, in this country, then youre old enough to understand it. If theyre under 16, hold back.

Gbear

A better way to ready teens for having sex than the age of consent being 17 is for sex ed to not be utterly terrible.

As recently as 2006 (when I was in secondary school) it was still mostly anti-sex propaganda desiged to scare children off sex.

Grab All Association

There was a case a few years ago. Two 15 year olds had sex and the girl ended up pregnant and the boy was brought to court for it. I don't think he got a custodial sentence but he was found guilty suspended sentence I think. She was just as guilty as him but she won the grand prize of child benefit payments I bet. Keep the age of consent at 17 but don't prosecute anyone up to the age of 19 if they do sleep with someone under 17. Anyone over 20 who finds teenagers attractive that's kind of sick. I'm 24 I wouldn't touch anyone under 20 we have nothing in common and I don't find acne faced teens attractive plus I hate teenagers get jobs you bums.

conorhal

It isn't 17 though, you can apply for a legal exception to marry at 16. This rediculous exception was added to allow Travellers marry young enough to ensure that immature teen brides could be placed under the thumb of a husband before any kind of maturity caused them to question why their expectations shouldn't extend beyond cooking an cleaning.
Only this month we had the awful situation in which a young Egyptian teenager's parents applied for an exemption for the 16yr old girl to allow her to marry a 32yr old man, a judge granted the exemption because, as with the travellers, it's their culture. The girl was forced into the marriage and despite seeking a teachers help because she was unhappy about being forced into this marriage, she was plucked from the care of social services and spirited away to Egypt.

There plenty of good reasons that laws regarding an age of consent be in place and set at a reasonable age, most of them are about preventing the exploitation of women, and rightly so.

Gbear

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

We are not animals.

You are mistaken.

Problem123456

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

The age of consent in Spain is 13, which means it's completely legal for a man or woman of any age to sleep with a 13-year-old. That doesn't sit right with me at all.

No you have to be under 18 or something

Legs.Eleven

mike65 wrote: »

Does it happen much though I wonder? Or is the law merely reflecting reality rather than pious hope in those countries?

I'm guessing it doesn't happen often here in Spain or at least it's not something you see (older men/women with young girls/boys). There was a case recently in the news where a girl of 13 had a boyfriend in his 30s and he got jealous and murdered her...but that has nothing to do with age.

So you're right, I think.

Legs.Eleven

Problem123456 wrote: »

No you have to be under 18 or something

I don't know the ins and outs myself tbh. This would make more sense alright.

JonSnuuu

I still don't understand how it is fair/the law that if a 14 year old boy has sex with a 16 year old girl, it's the boy that will be brought up on charges and the girl gets off scot free? Where's the logic? are they presuming the poor "innocent" girls would never willingly do something like that and that they must have been forced into doing it by the boy?

stimpson

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

If theyre under 16, hold back.

I think you'll find the age of consent for girls is 17.

hatrickpatrick

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

Why is it too high? Do you think because the law says 17 people wait? Me arse.


The one thing that does need to change is the law relating to statutory rape though and the fact that it only applies to males. That really needs to change.

The fact that such discrimination is allowed to exist in our laws disgusts me to my core. All laws should be completely gender neutral.

IM0

what has kids got to do with the arguement, you do realise we have these things called condoms for the last 30+ years

Legs.Eleven

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The fact that such discrimination is allowed to exist in our laws disgusts me to my core. All laws should be completely gender neutral.

Agreed.

RustyNut

Because taking pleasure from your mickey is a big sin, god himself said so and god forbid you should take pleasure from somebody else's mickey. These are the things that make the baby Jesus cry bitterly and so our politicos have decided to criminalise young people who offend god and the baby Jesus.

suicide_circus

floggg wrote: »

Ready or not, they are doing it.

If we follow that logic, a whole bunch of stuff is going to become legal because people are doing it.

titan18 wrote: »

Dunno, other countries seem to think so though, and get on fine. Don't really see it as some magical age where one day they can't, and then the next day they've suddenly grown up and are ready. Some are, some aren't, as long as it's not someone much older taking advantage of them, it should be up to themselves making a good decision

why have any age of consent at all in that case?

I am opposed to nannystate-ism and government interference in people's lives for the most part but I question the wisdom of allowing 50 year olds to have sex with 14 year olds.

Why are 14 year olds not allowed to hold a full time job, why cant they enter legal contracts?

Problem123456

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

I don't know the ins and outs myself tbh. This would make more sense alright.

Yeah I'm pretty sure that's how it works if they are under 15. There can't be more than 5 years between the two.

RustyNut

suicide_circus wrote: »

I am opposed to nannystate-ism and government interference in people's lives for the most part but I question the wisdom of allowing 50 year olds to have sex with 14 year olds.

I don't think the OP was referring to 50 year old paedos having sex with teenagers which is outside the norms in any sociaty. It's more a case like this which criminalises a young teenager with all the life long affects that a sex offender must carry.

This poor young lads life is ruined for what should not be a crime in the first place.

Larbre34

Problem123456 wrote: »

No you have to be under 18 or something

Actually you don't, currently - and its to do with a strong gypsy tradition in Spain

However a recent test case where a 13 yo girl ended up being murdered by a 39 year old 'partner' (cant think of a suitable word - abuser perhaps?) after her parents had complained to Police over the nature of the relationship and the Police claimed powerlessness to intervene after the girl made a statement that she was consenting. Law makers in Spain are seeking to raise it to 16 in line with neighbouring countries

The age of consent in Spain only became 13 years in 1996, up till then it was 12!! However for a gold star, can you guess the only other European State where the age of consent remains 12.......

You've guessed it, its......

VATICAN CITY!!!!!!

Demonique

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Yeah I don't agree with that. Denmark is 15 and Sweden is 16, and yet it seems to be a blanket age of consent. To be honest, there should be a minimum age to be to consent to anybody above that age.

There's one country (I think it's Mexico) where underage people can have sex with anyone who's between two years older and two years younger than them, e.g. 17 year olds can have sex with anyone who's between 15-19, 16 year olds anyone who's 14-18, etc.
The minimum age of consent is 12 (they can have sex with anyone who's up to two years older than them, but not younger)
Anyone who has sex with someone who's under the age of 12 could be charged with statutory rape. I'm not sure but it looks like a 17 year old girl who has sex with a 13 year old boy could be charged with statutory rape.

It's certainly a better law than in England where a 15 year old girl could have a baby with a 13 year old boy and he could face statutory rape charges as a result despite the girl being older.

Frank Lee Midere

These threads bore me. Sometimes Ireland may actually be right. 17 is about right , 16 at a stretch. 13 is too young.

Czarcasm

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

I'm guessing it doesn't happen often here in Spain or at least it's not something you see (older men/women with young girls/boys). There was a case recently in the news where a girl of 13 had a boyfriend in his 30s and he got jealous and murdered her...but that has nothing to do with age.

So you're right, I think.

I've not finished reading through the thread yet but as far as I know in Spain if deceit is used to gain consent of a person under 16, the person carrying out the deception can be charged if the parents make a complaint.

I heard about that case recently too (from a friend in Portugal) -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/10089339/Spain-to-raise-age-of-consent-from-13-to-16.html

AndonHandon

The agent of consent should be 12/13/14 but only for people who are under 17 i.e. people 17 and over can only have sex with people aged 17 and over.

One argument made for this; teens are having sex anyway.

One argument against this; that doesn't make it alright.

My response; the fact 12/13 year olds are having sex is an unfortunate reality of life but I feel it is more of a family issue then a legal issue. The age of consent did not deter myself and my girlfriend from having sex when we were 15/16 (I forget exactly). Looking back I was too young, but to potentially get a statutory rape conviction for doing that is harrowing and archaic.

meoklmrk91

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The fact that such discrimination is allowed to exist in our laws disgusts me to my core. All laws should be completely gender neutral.

I remember a few years back in my local area an 18 year old woman got pregnant for a 14 year old boy, everyone either didn't bat an eyelid or made jokes about it, if it was the other way around people would have been calling the man a pedo and saying it was a disgrace. I wouldn't have been much younger than the boy at the time, maybe 3-4 years but even at that age the double standard didn't sit right with me.

Age of consent should be 16 for both sexes IMHO and none of this double standard bs.

Frank Lee Midere

AndonHandon wrote: »

The agent of consent should be 12/13/14 but only for people who are under 17 i.e. people 17 and over can only have sex with people aged 17 and over.

One argument made for this; teens are having sex anyway.

One argument against this; that doesn't make it alright.

My response; the fact 12/13 year olds are having sex is an unfortunate reality of life but I feel it is more of a family issue then a legal issue. The age of consent did not deter myself and my girlfriend from having sex when we were 15/16 (I forget exactly). Looking back I was too young, but to potentially get a statutory rape conviction for doing that is harrowing and archaic.

It's wrong but it is not "archaic" because for most of history the age of consent was puberty. So blaming Catholicism won't help here - the imbalance in this law seems more or less related to modern feminism.

Femme_Fatale

Henlars67 wrote: »

We are a nation with a high percentage of prudes and conservative catholic morons.

The days of them having much of an influence in relation to sex are gone. The "prude" stuff re Ireland gets over-stated IMO. Not sure the age of consent still being 17 is to do with something as trivial as prudishness.

I agree though 15 seems about right. I don't know why - it's just the age that makes most sense to me.

Re the emotional consequences of sex: something else that I think is over-stated. I think it depends more on the individual. It's no big deal at all to some people. I think contraception should be more of a focus than the emotional consequences. Personally I've gone through stages where I only wanted emotional attachment sex, and stages where I only wanted casual, no-strings ridin'.
That said, 14 seems too young - I know I'm contradicting the above somewhat, but it's not a straightforward topic. Plus, nobody who's a virgin later than what's deemed the norm (16 I'd say) should feel bad about it.

Femme_Fatale

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

It's wrong but it is not "archaic" because for most of history the age of consent was puberty. So blaming Catholicism won't help here - the imbalance in this law seems more or less related to modern feminism.

That particular legislation was not created by modern feminism, no.

StickyIcky

stimpson wrote: »

Like going to jail?

Like having a baby and going to jail. Yay Ireland!

RustyNut

I think the Swiss have it about right, 16 is the general age of concent, there is also a 3 year age differance clause that protects young people from prosecution if they engage in sex under that age but also protects young people from predatory adults.

They also have one of the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy in Europe.

Speisekarte

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

The majority of 20 year olds arent ready for the emotional and possible practical consequences of sex..

To answer the OQ, im not sure. The churches previous iron grip definitely factors in, I think.

Well then they aren't emotionally ready to work or cross the street on their own. Make it illegal I say.