Age of Consent Arguments

The following is a list of the main arguments used to support the present day feminist age of consent.  Historically, the age of consent generally co-incided with the average age at which girls began puberty.  Beginning in the late 19th century, feminists began to successfully have the age raised to as high as 16 in the UK and even 18 in some states of the USA.  Note that the average age of ‘menarche’ in the UK and USA is now 10 or 11 (in Victorian London, when the age of consent was raised, it was 17), and a majority of females have completed puberty by the age of 16.

When considering these feminist arguments that supposedly justify the present age of consent it is important to note that they are usually quite different to the arguments used by the 19th century Victorian suffragettes who originally set the AofC over 100 years ago (for example, most of the Suffragettes were Christians who believed sex outside of marriage to be a wicked sin – they were effectively trying to criminalize pre-marital sex).

DisclaimerThis site strongly and unreservedly condemns ‘statutory rape’ and underage sex with teens. Aside from the general moral and social good of respecting the law, such illegal acts expose a young person to the predations and toxic effect of the feminist child abuse industry and court system.  This site also does not take a strong stand on what the age of consent should be, in itself.  However, the outrageous hysteria over ‘statutory rape’ and increasingly barbaric punishments handed out across the supposedly civilised world for even minor infractions of the law, are clearly a men’s rights issue and an anti-feminist concern, and to address these issues, and to highlight how excessive and barbaric these punishments are, it is necessary to discuss the underlying logic of feminist age of consent justifications.  This is even more important now that leading men’s rights activists are actively supporting a feminist age of consent as high as 18 in order to label teenage boys engaging in willing sex with older women (or men) as ‘child abuse victims’ (in the name of equality!!).

This page is intended to merely list the major arguments used by feminists in support of a high age of consent, together with a brief outline of each.  Each argument will eventually be examined at length on a separate page.  I think it would be better if we reserve discussion and analysis to the relevant page dedicated to the particular argument in question.  But please suggest any arguments that I have missed in the comments section below, as well as any objections to how I have phrased or seperated the arguments listed.

A note on terminology – as what we are discussing is really whether sex with teens should or should not be illegal (or deserving of draconian punishments),  and for the sake of brevity and simplicity, I use the term ‘teen’ to refer to the underage person, and ‘adult’ to refer to the older partner.  I dislike the term ‘minor’ as it is a term that is being deliberately abused in order to create the moral norm that any sex with under 18s is wrong.  The term ‘minor’ commonly refers to a person not of voting age, or not in possesion of the ‘majority’ of the rights of an adult.  Although the voting age is commonly 18 across most of the world (though a trend is emerging for this to be lowered), the age of consent is 18 in less than 2% of the nations of the Earth – mostly backward and theocratic Islamic or American states.  Of course, one of the key refutations of feminist age of consent laws is to counter-argue that teenagers are adults, or at least not children.

Note also that many of the arguments, or aspects of them, overlap with others.  It should also be noticed that supporters of the age of consent often appear to pick one argument almost at random to justify their position.  The fact that there are so many different arguments used to validate the present age of consent should itself be a cause of suspicion (as well as the fact, noted above, that most of these arguments are different to the original Victorian arguments used).  This is quite unlike positions on other obvioius moral truths – for example, such as why murder is wrong, or even less historically held truths, such as why racism is wrong.  In these instances, it is quite easy to articulate one commonly agreed definition or reason as to why we hold it to be plainly wrong (i.e., racism is wrong because it fails to treat a person as an individual but rather as the subject of a generalisation).


The Imbalance In Power Argument –  There is an assumed imbalance in power between the adult and teen.  This imbalance in power means that the relationship is inherently abusive.

The Harm Argument – Sex between an adult and a teenager leads to inherent harm and psychological damage for the younger person, independent of the defining of the act as abuse or harmful (else the argument would be simply self-fulfilling and empty).

The Lack of Informed Consent Argument – The age of consent refers to the age at which a person can be reasonably expected to be able to give ‘informed consent’ to sexFeminists are typically vague as to what this mysterious ‘informed consent’ involves.

The Adult Only Wants One Thing Argument – Underage sex is abusive because the adult must necessarily be only interested in sex with the teen.

The Failure to Respect the Teen as a Person Over Time Argument – Similar to above, but not identical.  This is a common ‘philosophical’ justification of the age of consent.  States that the adult is only interested in the teen as a teen, rather than as a person.

The Unmarried Sex With a Teen is Wrong Argument – Proponents of this argument hold that what is wrong in particular with adults having sex with teens is that it is necessarily unmarried sex (in most countries the marriage age is now higher than the age of consent).  This argument is often used to counter the historical fact that for most of human history over 18s having sex with adolescent teens was normal or even the norm – in most cases the older partner would be married to the young girl, or would marry.  This argument is often used by Conservative men’s rights supporters and their femiservative co-opters. Again, it is related to the previous two arguments listed.

The Innocent Child Argument – Teens under the age of consent are sexually innocent.  An adult having sex with a teen represents an act of defilement and a premature loss of sexual ‘innocence’.

The Woman Will Later Regret It Argument – One of the most commonly used arguments, it is held as valid even if no demonstrable harm has been caused by the teenage sex, but also often used as evidence of harm in itself, or as a cause of supposed harm.  The subjective testimony and feeling of the ‘abused’ woman as she looks back on her youthful experience is held to be beyond question. Can also be described as the ‘woman will regret early sex argument’.  Held to be valid even if, as a teen, the female felt good about the sexual relationship.

27 thoughts on “Age of Consent Arguments”

  1. Those arguments strike me as post-hoc rationalizations that feminists now construct because the original justification for age of consent laws has gone out of style. At least believing sex outside of marriage to be a “wicked sin” or something along those lines is a coherent position to take, that cannot be so easily refuted by logic, even if I don’t agree with it. That is really a claim about God rather than human nature and hence it is pretty much unassailable by logic. In the current political climate, however, all sex laws need to be justified on the basis of criminalizing “abuse” of some kind rather than legislating morality (even prostitution is now defined as abuse/trafficking of women rather than a sin against God in which the whore is just as guilty as the john). And so the feminist abuse industry seeks to justify their laws by making claims about human nature rather than morality, and the good news is that much of this can be shown to be factually wrong, although then again some of these rationalizations in turn sadly become self-fulfilling prophecies as teenagers are brainwashed into thinking they are victims.

    Also, the imbalance of power argument (which ignores the fact that the average young woman has sexual power far surpassing what men can have by virtue of just about any position) is already legislated on its own at least her in Norway, so even if the age of consent was abolished today, it wouldn’t make much difference. Claiming abuse based on a power imbalance (or some vague “position of trust” that can be nothing more formal than a friendship) is a silver bullet which women can use to involve the police in all sex otherwise covered by age of consent laws and much, much more. As an example, there is a huge scandal going on here in Norway at the moment where a politician (or ex-politician, as of course he is completely ostracized now) had sex with a 17-year-old girl when he was 37. The display of misandry generated by this case shocked even me and is worse than anything I’ve seen before. The girl was above the age of consent, but all the feminists and manginas (including the offender himself!) in politics and the media agree that the age difference in itself (and the fact that the woman was also a member of the party) made the relationship a “breach of trust” for a politician and the woman could have had convicted by the imbalance of power law if she had wanted. There are even calls for the police to investigate the case independently without an accusation from the girl. So the situation for men is far more dismal than what even the age of consent laws would indicate. Ago of consent is merely a small subset of the laws available to imprison men for sex, and there are nearly always alternative laws that can get you at least as much jail time. Imbalance of power, for example, can get you six years in Norway and this law knows no age limit.

  2. And this is why accepting age-of-consent laws and the way they’re now enforced will do not good, because the very notion of consent, regardless of the woman’s age, has been diluted away already. If you accept that a 17 who solves differential equations at school is too immature do decide to have sex with whomever she wants, then all women on Earth are immature and can only be victims.

  3. Eivind:
    American politicians too have been toying with the idea of making age differences qualify as ‘stauatory rape.’ Ironically the femihags have been opposed to it, since obviously too many ‘cougars’ would get caught in the same dragnet!

    However, that may change in the near future with our current (and growing) socially-conservative brand of feminism which seeks to equalize both genders under the same socially repressive laws. As Paul Elam recently said “the goal of the MRM is to finish the work that feminism started”: and that apparently means Equal Injustice for everyone.

  4. Socon feminists especially employ the ‘Imbalance in Power’ argument, along with its variant the ‘Innocent Child’ argument. The first is inherently contradictory since the girl often has enormous sexual power over the man. The Megan Stammers Case comes to mind. The second one, of course, is absurd: biology, psychology, and human history all refute it on its face.

    The rest of the arguments are simply based on emotion and opinion and can’t even meet a logical definition.

  5. The Inexperience Argument – It is claimed to be abusive if an “experienced” adult has sex with an “inexperienced” teen. Feminists are typically vague as to what it means to be “inexperienced”, or why it even matters. It is simply assumed that all teens are “inexperienced” (because they are younger than adults), and all adults are “experienced” (because they are older than teens), and an “experienced” person having sex with an “inexperienced” person is abusive. For example, if an adult who is a virgin has sex with a teen who has had sex 100 times with 10 different sex partners, then feminists would assert that the adult is “experienced”, the teen is “inexperienced”, and the adult abused the teen. This is related to the Imbalance In Power Argument, the Lack of Informed Consent Argument and the Innocent Child Argument.

    The Large Difference In Age Argument – The feminist will simply point out the large difference in age between the teen and the adult (in those cases where there is a large difference in age), and assert that this alone proves that the relationship is abusive. This is related to the Imbalance In Power Argument and the Inexperience Argument.

  6. @ Anonymous:

    For example, if an adult who is a virgin has sex with a teen who has had sex 100 times with 10 different sex partners, then feminists would assert that the adult is “experienced”, the teen is “inexperienced”, and the adult abused the teen.

    My perception is that conservative feminists in particular blame this on the absence of a strong father figure. Which is perhaps ironic, that feminists should point to the importance of a strong male parent, but it’s just their way of once again blaming men, this time for their daughters’ “slutty” sexual conduct. These feminists want to have their cake and eat it too, meaning you’re damned if you’re a strong alpha male father figure (because you embody patriarchy), and you’re also damned if you’re a feckless absentee parent. And everything in between really, because let’s not kid ourselves about what feminists, any feminist, thinks about men.

    As for the argument of “lack of experience” and imbalance of power when a 17-year-old girl has slept with a dozen guys and lands in bed with, say, an early 20s virgin… yeah, what a joke. Even if the girl has slept with half the town and the poor guy has never even kissed a girl before, feminists will still insist that the girl is the victim and that the 20something beta male she seduced (sic) was the perpetrator (and many sex offender laws in the U.S. in particular reflect just that). Men can’t win. They’re not supposed to. And the early 20s shy bashful beta male who feels intimidated by women his age and perhaps has a little bit of psychosexual development to catch up on is a sitting duck for feminist misandry. I had many friends like that. They were meek, kind, good-natured guys who couldn’t hurt a fly. Back in the day, thankfully they were eventually able to find love with younger partners; girls of 16, maybe 17. Nobody even gave it much thought. But in this generation, the same meek and perhaps sometimes slightly repressed early 20s beta male is framed as a “child molester” and in the U.S. in particular as a sex offender often for the rest of his life. Again, not because they’re alpha male assertors of patriarchy, but because they’re easy beta male targets for the feminist and moral conservative abuse and pedohysteria industry.

  7. @Eivind Berge

    Shocking. I jokingly suggested to make it a felony to have sex with anyone more then 5 years apart in age.
    So a 65 year old man with a 55 year old woman: statutory rape!

    The main reason I never wrote it: I was afraid of my idea being picked up.

    You always note that a relation with a totally legal 19 year old and a 55 year old man is considered absurd and most people wish it was illegal.

    Seems to almost be reality in Sweden. If you check my blog under Brazil, things are getting worse even in Brazil.

    Check my last 2 posts on age of consent!

  8. The Old Enough To Be Father Argument – Feminists will often say “He’s old enough to be her father.”, when the Adult is chronologically old enough to be the teen’s father. Thus implying that simply saying this proves the relationship is abusive. This is a variation on the Large Difference In Age Argument, but different enough to be treated separately.

  9. The Grooming Argument – If a teen has sex with an adult, it is because the adult “groomed” the teen. Grooming is assumed to be a form of abuse. Feminists are typically vague as to what “grooming” means.

  10. Note that Western consulates already turn down fiance visa applications when the man is markedly older than his exotic bride. The excuse for doing so is officially that the marriage will not be legit because of the age gap and the woman is only after a stay permit in the West. In that sense such a mixed marriage is treated like a proforma marriage, although in fact it is just the opposite in the sense that the middle-age bridegroom is most certainly marrying for sex (a proforma marriage being defined as a marriage without sex). The distinction between a real marriage and a marriage of convenience is another distinction getting blurred by feminism.

  11. Jack, you are a genius! I couldn’t have put it better myself and I’m markedly older than my exotic bride. If I know anyone in that ‘predicament’ (and it really would be a predicament) later on, I will give him your explanation above so he can use it to ‘remind’ his country’s immigration dept. officials, (and BTW they are invariably middle-aged women with 1 or 2 manginas just to observe PC requirements) what a REAL marriage is and why they MUST grant his fiance her visa!

  12. @Alan Vaughn

    isn’t it also fact that in the U.S., the feminazi government has considerably put the screws on the mail-order bride business? I think I read somewhere a while back that, of course in the name of “protecting foreign women from exploitation”, they have put so much red tape around the whole process that it’s a gigantic hassle to meet ANY foreign women living outside the U.S. at all, whether they’re mail order brides or just women off international dating sites…

  13. @IR

    I think I read somewhere a while back that, of course in the name of “protecting foreign women from exploitation”, they have put so much red tape around the whole process that it’s a gigantic hassle to meet ANY foreign women living outside the U.S. at all, whether they’re mail order brides or just women off international dating sites…

    You heard or read, correctly: the US bitter and jealous femihags of the US gynocracy, coerced the US government to pass their ridiculous, misandrist IMBRA laws in March 2006.

    I’m an Australian citizen and thus far there are no restrictions placed on Australian men, but I think something along the lines of what Jack mentioned above, regarding consulates turning down fiance visa applications is already occurring, but not legally…

  14. Jack:
    Thank you for that update. I had heard that Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton introduced yet another ‘unofficial’ (i.e., illegal) policy directive to immigration officials outlining age differences as ‘suspicious’. I have a feeling that most of these VISA refusals could be challenged legally, but that’s a difficult process over here.

    If you can’t find a good immigrant girl here in the US, expatting is really becoming the best option. Even if you do find a younger immigrant, as the Japan article above shows, you won’t be immune from vigilante persecution.

  15. Inclinedreader:
    Your observations are quite correct. Not only are the laws aimed at discouraging foreign marriages, but the femihag US media—led by Supermangina Murdoch—has demonized men who seek foreign women. Anyone who pursues foreign women here is generally considered to be a suspicious character.

    In spite of all this, US marriages to foreign-born women is STILL the only marriage demographic that is increasing. The American STU is well aware of this. (The 2010 census showed that something like 20% of US children under 5 years old have a foreign-born mother). Because of this, the femihags are forced somewhat to walk a legal tightrope, rather than come down men brutally like they probably want to. Since most of these foreign wives/mothers are Asians and Latinas, they are also ‘protected’ minorities. (Euro-girls, BTW, don’t get nearly the same protections). So, they resort to these kinds of behind-the-scenes, quasi-legal tactics—for now.

    As a side note, I’ve also heard that femihag vigilante have taken to infiltrating foreign bride sites. They pose as foreign girls and then heap shaming language on the men who contact them. Really more of a nuisance than a serious problem, but it shows how consumed by jealousy and hatred these femihags really are.

  16. Speaking of paedocrites and co-opting, check out this link, provided by our friend the Scarecrow today:

    The author ‘CameraLady’ explains to us that feminism and mens rights are ‘one and the same thing’ and that ‘classical feminism was concerned with men’s rights.’

    And note in the commentary that Typhon Blue is there, wholeheartedly egging it all on—while Fraudtrelle is there arguing that feminism and the MRM are irreconcibile!

    The state of American gender relations is looking more and more like the Vietnam War every day.

    I think I’m getting close to another brain bleach time already! LOL Can’t decide whether to spend the evening reading Roman history or checking out the latest issue of ‘Teen Vogue.’

  17. @Eric : LOL. Apparently feminism only turned evil from the year, ‘like say’, 2000!!!

    Still not as sickening as the post that was on top with nearly 200 upvotes already :

    One commentator says he’s going to make a donation to the group putting up the posters, the next commentator casually asks (uncritically) if ‘anyone knows where they got their statistics from’.

    I posted a couple of comments that were downvoted into oblivion.

    Truly is no hope.

  18. @Eric

    Really more of a nuisance than a serious problem, but it shows how consumed by jealousy and hatred these femihags really are.

    It sure does. How low does one have to go??

  19. @theantifeminist
    Yes I read the entire thread (and your comments and manginic replies to them). That’s why the only time I ever visit reddit is when you refer (with a link) to anything there. I call it ‘ manginasRights’

  20. @theantifeminist
    Here’s ‘a step in the right direction’:
    I opened a new account at reddit, (I’d forgotten my login anyway), it’s almost the same name as yours (‘msamcrook’) and added my 2 cents worth to that thread about the stupid sign some mangina ‘found’ in a bus and photographed and posted, if you’re interested just go back there and read…

    Pathetic mangina girlies… LOL.

  21. @Alan I see my post at reddit is already getting downvoted…and this is before the American mRAs have even gotten out of bed!!

  22. age of consent should be 12

    women were meant to bear children at their menarche, which is usually 11-13 years of age

Comments are closed.