So... for a very long time now the age of consent here has ostensibly been 16.
Something like 15 years ago they changed the gay age of consent from 18 to 16, so basically they doubled down on 16.
But in actuality it seems to be de facto illegal or at least kind of illegal adjacent. Because they'll use it to blackmail or slander people, especially if they were significantly older than the girl who was 16/17. They basically portray it as paedophilia even though it was completely legal.
So... is it wrong or not? Because if it's wrong then surely it's also wrong to not change the law?
If it's OK, then why even mention it when somebody has sex with a 16 year old?
It's almost like we have unwritten "Romeo and Juliet" laws, basically.
So you can have sex with 16 or 17 year olds but only if you're under say 25 (maybe even 21) or you'll get effectively punished for it.
Maybe that's the way people need to see it if they want to keep themselves completely out of trouble.
Something like 15 years ago they changed the gay age of consent from 18 to 16, so basically they doubled down on 16.
But in actuality it seems to be de facto illegal or at least kind of illegal adjacent. Because they'll use it to blackmail or slander people, especially if they were significantly older than the girl who was 16/17. They basically portray it as paedophilia even though it was completely legal.
So... is it wrong or not? Because if it's wrong then surely it's also wrong to not change the law?
If it's OK, then why even mention it when somebody has sex with a 16 year old?
It's almost like we have unwritten "Romeo and Juliet" laws, basically.
So you can have sex with 16 or 17 year olds but only if you're under say 25 (maybe even 21) or you'll get effectively punished for it.
Maybe that's the way people need to see it if they want to keep themselves completely out of trouble.
Last edited:
