I recall many times growing up when I felt like my inalienable fundamental human rights were violated in unjust autocratic ways, mostly at school. There was also the time of being a year older than my partner but the potential of ridiculous arbitrary laws having major consequences.

I feel like the age of 18 as some kind of moral benchmark is ridiculous. I feel like it is just tied to the age of conscription. Basing sexual morality on the age when the state can abduct and murder without recourse is nonsense. Most of us likely exist in a duality where we might cringe at “underage” of any kind, but not think twice when a couple of teens are dating and in a physical consensual relationship that is respectful and private.

So from a distant future culture’s perspective, like if Star Trek TNG existed in hard SciFi, and there is no need for our present arbitrary policy enforcement, what should be the basis of adolescent autonomous agency?

  1. Maybe it is weening, cultural pressures, and education.

  2. Maybe it is full independence and self sufficiency.

For the record, this is my favored idea as it pressures society to enable a balanced financial early life and opportunities. It also adjusts to account for real world maturity levels. IMO, it is either this or number 1 as these are derived from individual human life phases.

  1. Maybe you think it should be something else?
  • balderdash@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    We have to draw the age of consent somewhere, and better err on the side of “slightly older than it needs to be”.

    • GCanuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      As I get older, I feel the age should be raised to 25.

      Younger me would vehemently disagree.

      But ya, this comment sums up the issue n the least amount of words.

      • Landsharkgun@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I mean, a bunch of Victorian ladies already came up with “half the older persons’s age plus 7” and I wouldn’t feel terrible about making that the official yardstick. Kinda makes sense to have an age of consent that’s relative to how old you are.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Even that gets kinda ridiculous as you get into higher ages. Like why should it be anyone else’s business if a 30 year old wants to get with a 60 year old? And at some point, the power dynamic shifts to the younger member of the couple, but that’s even more case dependent because you can have some cases where an 80 year old takes advantage of a 40 year old and other cases where a 40 year old takes advantage of an 80 year old.

          I’d rather see a system that doesn’t restrict people so arbitrarily but helps minimize the damage that one person can do to another when taking advantage of them, which can happen with couples of the same age, too.

        • Acamon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I was introduced to the “half your age plus seven” as the acceptable minimum age for dating someone, and it does work reasonably well for a good range of ages. But then I found out that it was originally the upper age limit for an acceptable bride…