GameBanshee Forums

Well for one thing the 22 year old has his butt on the line. If the 16 year old decides to ruin him she can divulge the incident to authorities.

In my state the penalty is up to 15 years in prison. Statutory rape.

Claudius wrote:Well for one thing the 22 year old has his butt on the line. If the 16 year old decides to ruin him she can divulge the incident to authorities.

In my state the penalty is up to 15 years in prison. Statutory rape.

"The legal age of consent in Ontario is 16. She is legal."

And besides, legality is only marginally linked to ethicality, which is what I presume we're discussing.

I said my state. I didn't bother reading the blog or whatever. I guess its fine in Ontario. But he's still robbing the cradle

(in my opinion the 16 year old girls seemed to young for me by the time I was in college and they were still living with their parents in highschool. I can see that this is not an absolute issue. If a 22 and 16 year old want to do that fine. And if dad wants to be angry fine.)

Claudius wrote:I said my state. I didn't bother reading the blog or whatever. I guess its fine in Ontario. But he's still robbing the cradle

Well, in Vicsunland, any sort of sexual intercourse that doesn't involve Vicsun is illegal. What's the relevance?

Vicsun If you come to my state and have sex with the wrong girl you might have 15 years to think about that

(I'm sure if I came to Vicsunland untold horrors would await me too haha)

Edit: but I agree that your right that Michigan is not relevant in Ontario. I hadn't read the blog.

Claudius wrote:I said my state. I didn't bother reading the blog or whatever. I guess its fine in Ontario. But he's still robbing the cradle

News Flash!

As CE says here:

For young girls, I personally think it's good to have sexual relationships with somewhat older guys, since teenage girls are on the average 2 years ahead of the guys in both physical and mental maturity. At group level, young girls also have more difficulties reaching sexual satisfaction than boys, so it's also generally a good idea to have sex with guys who are more experienced and skilled than boys the same age.

I agree completely with the above.
It is actually not unusual for girls/women to prefer older boys/men...
Why? Because, in less diplomatic terms, all too often those who are around the same age tend to be immature little gits...

And.. er.. Six years is *not* "robbing the cradle."

When I was 17 I was seeing a guy who was 26, it worked out fine. Indeed, the majority of men I've been involved with have been at least five years older than me. Though, ironically, the SO is younger than me by a few months. Hmmm... maybe that's why things can get so rocky between us..

DW,

This is not an absolute issue. What seemed normal for you might not seem normal for me. But I can guarantee you that it is statutory rape to have sex with a 16 year old girl in my state.

Claudius wrote:DW,

This is not an absolute issue. What seemed normal for you might not seem normal for me. But I can guarantee you that it is statutory rape to have sex with a 16 year old girl in my state.

Of course I recognise that such things vary from place to place, and much of it is cultural in origin. However, laws are entirely arbitrary in many cases.
And, as has already been stated.. It is not statutory rape in the province of Ontario, so in the context of the original topic (however dubious the intentions of the OP ), claims of impropriety are irrelevant.

Yes I agree.

Of course even in Ontario some people might think it was robbing the cradle. Some not. Some might think dreadlocks are weird some not. Some might think doll collecting is weird some not. Some might think drinking is weird. Some not.

And so on...

I am just making that point because I wanted to come clear that I mean nothing wrong by saying normal or not normal. It is just my judgement. I hope you (and Vicsun) trust your judgement and I will trust mine.

And I am glad that both of you pointed out that the topic was Ontario. That focuses things a bit....

@DW and C Elegans

Just had a thought. What do you think of both a 16 year old 'boy' and 22 year old 'woman' who are dating?

Addition:

In my experience 16 year old girls hung out in packs and had extremely emotional reactions. Of any class of people they are the most susceptible to mass hysteria. Is this what is meant by mature? Just the other side of the coin

Regarding age difference, both are within the "young adult"-age span, so I don't see a problem there. Pedophilia refers to sexual attraction to pre-adolescent children, and a girl of 16 is several years beyond that unless she has some hormonal or developmental disorder.

Well, I did not really wanted to get involved, but since CE presents her "expert opinion", I would like to present mine.

Psychology 101:
Adolescence is a developmental period lasting from about ages 12 to 18. The so-called early adulthood stage (when people can be officially called "young adults") is from early 20s to 29. Therefore, it is incorrect to call a 16 yr old a young adult, even if she is more than willing to take her panties off.
Which she is welcome to do.

BTW, talking about the age of consent in Canada, it is 14, not 16.

» Bill C-22 The Age of Protection Act by Rose DesRochers - World Outside my Window

Age of Consent at 14 Makes Canada Favoured Sex Tourism Destination

Claudius wrote: Just had a thought. What do you think of both a 16 year old 'boy' and 22 year old 'woman' who are dating?

Same thing, minus the advantage for a young girl to date an older boy. In this case, I'd say it's an advantage for the young boy in terms of sexual experience.

Lady Dragonfly wrote: Psychology 101:
Adolescence is a developmental period lasting from about ages 12 to 18. The so-called early adulthood stage (when people can be officially called "young adults") is from early 20s to 29. Therefore, it is incorrect to call a 16 yr old a young adult, even if she is more than willing to take her panties off.
Which she is welcome to do.

"Psychology 101" may differ from professional, clinical psychology. In clinical psychology, "adolescence" and "puberty" are both professional terms that refer to something specific, whereas "young adult" is not a professional term (not in Swedish, anyway), merely an expression that denotes a person who is not a child and not entirely adult. In Swedish, you would not call a 25-year old a "young adult", only an adult. It may be different in the US, what do I know, but where I live and work, the term "young adult" is a non-professional term, mostly used by laymen and it usually refers to teenagers and post-adolescents, approximately from 15-23 years of age.

I don't think that experience is a universal 'good'. I can't speak for everyone but I find the emotions and friendship to be 100 hundred times more important than experience. I understand that sexual difficulties can end relationships but I don't think I'd put experience top on my list. I imagine expectations can be very fragile.

I might question why the older person is dating someone younger than them before getting in a relationship with someone older. I might want to date someone who was going through similar things as me. In some sense I think at a young age you think that older is better. For example younger siblings are always trying to do what the older is doing. I think this is like that (and the older guy just wants a piece). Perhaps you could miss being your own age?

@CE

"Psychology 101" may differ from professional, clinical psychology. In clinical psychology, "adolescence" and "puberty" are both professional terms that refer to something specific, whereas "young adult" is not a professional term (not in Swedish, anyway), merely an expression that denotes a person who is not a child and not entirely adult. In Swedish, you would not call a 25-year old a "young adult", only an adult. It may be different in the US, what do I know, but where I live and work, the term "young adult" is a non-professional term, mostly used by laymen and it usually refers to teenagers and post-adolescents, approximately from 15-23 years of age.

You may call it Professional Psychology 101 then:

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), adolescence covers the period of life between 10 and 20 years of age. Adolescence is often divided by psychologists into three distinct phases: early, mid and late adolescence.

CE, I realize there may be some discrepancy between the professional terminologies in Sweden and in the USA (and the WHO), but let me assure you that a 16 years old is indeed called adolescent by the professionals, here, in the US.
Medium-to-late adolescent, or medium-well-done, if someone prefers hairsplitting arguments, but adolescent nonetheless.

I maintain that your statement that "both are within the "young adult"-age span" is incorrect. From the World Health Organization's point of view.

dragon wench wrote:News Flash!

As CE says here:



I agree completely with the above.
It is actually not unusual for girls/women to prefer older boys/men...
Why? Because, in less diplomatic terms, all too often those who are around the same age tend to be immature little gits...

And.. er.. Six years is *not* "robbing the cradle."

When I was 17 I was seeing a guy who was 26, it worked out fine. Indeed, the majority of men I've been involved with have been at least five years older than me. Though, ironically, the SO is younger than me by a few months. Hmmm... maybe that's why things can get so rocky between us..

Hah! This is why older men pick up young women: It's payback for the hell we went through as teenagers!:mischief::laugh:

Seriously, statistics here in Norway shows that "maturity" has far less to do with why teenage girls hook up with older guys than the classic "myth" claims. It's much more a question of status. An older guy has a car, a job, possibly a place of his own where you can escape from your parents. He can get you into clubs, parties etc. and of course get alcohol and drugs and buy you stuff. Most surveys shows that he can have (and usually has) the maturity of a 13 year old if those things are in order. I remember weeping bitter tears over the fact that all the prettiest girls in school hung out with these cool older guys, but when I look back at it today and see what utter tossers they were and what the girls went through, I just have to laugh at the whole thing. Maturity, my foot! BTW: our "age of consent" is 16, and there has been an ongoing debate about lowering it to 14. The current problem, which is a bit of a shock to everyone, is the trend of teenage boys having their sexual debuts with prostitutes. That problem is growing rapidly, and is a far bigger issue than whether a 20 year old guy shags a 16 year old girl.

Moonbiter wrote:Seriously, statistics here in Norway shows that "maturity" has far less to do with why teenage girls hook up with older guys than the classic "myth" claims... Most surveys shows that he can have (and usually has) the maturity of a 13 year old if those things are in order.

Wait, maturity can be quantified and subjected to statistical analysis? I am so screwed.

Vicsun wrote:Wait, maturity can be quantified and subjected to statistical analysis? I am so screwed.

In your case? A resounding YES! :laugh: I would also like to add that at the age of 20 I had a 17 year old girlfriend, and I still hadn't left puberty. Seriously, I had no illusions as to why she hooked up with me, and it certainly wasn't for my world-wise and mature behaviour. It was more a question of "He has hair down to his butt, plays guitar in a rock'n'roll band, rides a Harley and hangs out with all the cool people. He's a catch!" I certainly didn't give a flying rodent's behind about her being a straight A student, or being editor of her school newspaper. So much for "maturity." IMHO there's no doubt that girls between 12 and 18 years of age are far more "developed" in many ways than their male counterparts. However, to call it maturity is utter hogwash. Different priorities, yes, but that's not maturity. I have a large and rather vocal pack of female friends, and not one of them will look back and claim that they were "more mature" than the boys at 16. More focused, less confused, sadly more set in the roles that society had given them as women, but that's about it. The best teenage relationships for them, those that hurt the least and lasted the longest, were the ones with boys of their own age. Of course, hindsight is 20/20, and the girls in highschool will still go for the older jocks, or rockers, or cool/dangerous guys. It's been that way since before we invented fire, and it's an instinct, not a sign of maturity.

Vicsun wrote:Wait, maturity can be quantified and subjected to statistical analysis? I am so screwed.

Would you feel any better if I bought you an energy drink?

Not that it matters at all for the principal reasoning of the case this thread is about, but for the sake of hairsplitting, @LD. WHO is not a suitable sorce to seek exact definitions of medical terms. It's very much like using a dictionary, it may use a broad, roughtly correct definition but it is not necessarily the exact definition used by professionals.

Lady Dragonfly wrote: CE, I realize there may be some discrepancy between the professional terminologies in Sweden and in the USA (and the WHO), but let me assure you that a 16 years old is indeed called adolescent by the professionals, here, in the US.
Medium-to-late adolescent, or medium-well-done, if someone prefers hairsplitting arguments, but adolescent nonetheless.

I maintain that your statement that "both are within the "young adult"-age span" is incorrect. From the World Health Organization's point of view.

Since you obviously misunderstand how the terms are used but still put focus in using the correct terminology, I'll try to explain to you how most professionals use the terms:

"puberty" - the period that starts with the appearance of the so called secondary sexual characteristics, ie menstruation, deeper voice.

"adolescence" - whereas puberty refers to the physiological changes occuring when fertility sets in, adolescence refers to the psychosocial changes and psychological characteristics of this period in human life

To use pedophilia as an example: pedophilia is, according to the DSM-IV-R, defined as sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children. This is however a psychiatric definition - legally, some countries (Sweden for example) has a criminal offence labelled as "sexual abuse of a child" and in the legal sense, a person is defined as a child until 15 years of age.

"young adult" on the other hand is neither a specific psychiatric nor legal term. As I stated above, it is merely an expression that refers to people whos age range are intermediate between child and fully grown adult. This means "adolescent" and "young adult" has an overlap. Usually "young adult" can refer to teens in the late adolescence up to post-adolescent age. Some people even use "young adult" as synonymous with adolescent or teenager, especially from 15 years of age and onwards.

So, how WHO defines the term "young adult" is not especially relevant - btw, the US and the WHO definitions don't coincide either - since the WHO is by no means an authority in the field and the term "young adult" is not a professional term, it's simply synonymous with "youth".

Vicsun wrote:Wait, maturity can be quantified and subjected to statistical analysis? I am so screwed.

I wouldn't worry about it, they're going to have to dig to find mine.

@CE

Since you obviously misunderstand how the terms are used but still put focus in using the correct terminology, I'll try to explain to you how most professionals use the terms

Thank you, but I am familiar with the concept.

adolescence refers to the psychosocial changes and psychological characteristics of this period in human life

Most certainly. Ericson's epigenetic principle and his "eight stages of personality development" readily spring to mind. Especially stage five.

"young adult" on the other hand is neither a specific psychiatric nor legal term. As I stated above, it is merely an expression that refers to people whos age range are intermediate between child and fully grown adult. This means "adolescent" and "young adult" has an overlap. Usually "young adult" can refer to teens in the late adolescence up to post-adolescent age. Some people even use "young adult" as synonymous with adolescent or teenager, especially from 15 years of age and onwards.

You mean, when you stated "both are within the "young adult"-age span" , you spoke casually, not professionally? That is fine. The whole debate is more than casual. “Young adult” implies immaturity and lack of life experience (e.g. in Vicsunland ).

So, how WHO defines the term "young adult" is not especially relevant - btw, the US and the WHO definitions don't coincide either - since the WHO is by no means an authority in the field and the term "young adult" is not a professional term, it's simply synonymous with "youth".

WHO defined the term "young adult"? Actually, I said nothing of the sort. The quote merely stated that According to the World Health Organization (WHO), adolescence covers the period of life between 10 and 20 years of age, and I would add, covers roughly. Do the "stages" overlap? Probably not from the rigid classification standpoint. But since we clarified that we talk casually, sure. After all, this kind of classification is approximate and subjective.
The legal stuff is a different matter altogether. I suppose every country has its own perspective on the issue concerning the legality of sex with a minor. What is OK in Ontario (where the age of consent quite recently was just 12 years old), might be viewed as statutory rape in the US.

From the routine medical standpoint, everybody is a child up to age 18. The Adolescent Medicine specialists are rare, here. If memory serves, only about 500 have ever been trained.