4 ms·

>16 year olds might be naive, but they are also not small children and usually capable of saying no. (Body language no, is also a no). So do those horror storie

>16 year olds might be naive, but they are also not small children and usually capable of saying no. (Body language no, is also a no). So do those horror stories involve ignoring a "no" from Ginsberg towards a minor? Bruh you're justifying statutory rape due to a highly unjust power imbalance. Also have you met a 16-year-old in real life? They are children.

lukan 1y ago
I am not justifying anything, I merely said there is a difference to me and I like to know more before forming a final opinion, see my shared anecdota as for why. The post above where I replied literally said: "young male children" But are 16 year olds really "young male children"? I don't think so, but stating it like this makes it a much, much worse accusation against Ginsberg in my eyes.
- Forgeties79 1y ago
  I can’t believe what I’m reading in this thread.
  - wahnfrieden 1y ago
    It's disgusting
t-3 1y ago
16 is the age of consent in most of the US (by land area at least). Not that US laws around sex are necessarily good policy, but it reflects that there is no broad societal consensus on whether or not the 16-year-olds have the ability to consent.
- justinator 1y ago
  If I -- someone in their mid 40's -- had a friend my age who had a string of sex partners that were are 16, 17, 18 and gained access to those individuals through a network constructed from fame and friends, they would cease to be my friend because that is pretty disgusting, laws be-damned. (and you seem to not factor in that many statutory rape laws have age gap determinants) But I see that you are different.
  - t-3 1y ago
    I'm quite sympathetic to what you're saying, what he did was very creepy regardless of legality. I merely take issue with the idea that 16 year olds cannot consent - most people seem to think they can if the legal standards is to be used a rough indicator of societal consensus, and I can also remember being 16. That doesn't mean I think it's OK for people to molest children or that adults structuring their lives around access to teenagers or children isn't likely criminal predatory behavior.

lukan 1y ago

I am not justifying anything, I merely said there is a difference to me and I like to know more before forming a final opinion, see my shared anecdota as for why. The post above where I replied literally said: "young male children" But are 16 year olds really "young male children"? I don't think so, but stating it like this makes it a much, much worse accusation against Ginsberg in my eyes.

Forgeties79 1y ago
I can’t believe what I’m reading in this thread.
- wahnfrieden 1y ago
  It's disgusting

t-3 1y ago

16 is the age of consent in most of the US (by land area at least). Not that US laws around sex are necessarily good policy, but it reflects that there is no broad societal consensus on whether or not the 16-year-olds have the ability to consent.

justinator 1y ago
If I -- someone in their mid 40's -- had a friend my age who had a string of sex partners that were are 16, 17, 18 and gained access to those individuals through a network constructed from fame and friends, they would cease to be my friend because that is pretty disgusting, laws be-damned. (and you seem to not factor in that many statutory rape laws have age gap determinants) But I see that you are different.
- t-3 1y ago
  I'm quite sympathetic to what you're saying, what he did was very creepy regardless of legality. I merely take issue with the idea that 16 year olds cannot consent - most people seem to think they can if the legal standards is to be used a rough indicator of societal consensus, and I can also remember being 16. That doesn't mean I think it's OK for people to molest children or that adults structuring their lives around access to teenagers or children isn't likely criminal predatory behavior.