Posts by "chris"
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Can you ever be ready for an STD?
No you're quite right Ben you certainly can't, though I would contend that in some cases the recklessness of youth does seem to dull with age to some extent. Were your friends being cautious for cautious sake or because they'd failed to take adequate precautions
-
Up Front: It's Complicated, in reply to BenWilson,
And with due respect to your friends and their swabbuckling adventures, they possibly weren’t quite ready either. I understand that these kinds of mythologies are valuable currency in the schoolyard and I’m certainly not advocating raising the age. But in many ways I'm envious of your more leisurely stroll into adulthood.
-
I have heard those swabs are really painful. Are they still necessary? I’m not all broken up about the night club experience at 14, it’s just one of a great many missed opportunities.
To be honest Ben, I find that a little sensationalised. There are complications which as a 17 year old I was not mature enough to handle. If Chlamydia spreads into the uterus, it can cause scarring and decrease the chances of pregnancy. Not fully aware of the seriousness of these complications I was unable or unwilling to make a concerted effort to try to contact the individual from whom I contracted it. Secondly I ended up passing it on to my girlfriend, who also underwent testing and treatment, thirdly we failed to abstain for the full duration of the treatment period, passing it back between us and therefore had to commence the treatment again. Which come to think of it probably helps to clarify my position on the issue no end, i.e. I wasn't ready even though it was legal.
-
Up Front: It's Complicated, in reply to Emma Hart,
Also, let’s never ever forget that, no matter how old you are, you can’t legally “make a decision” to have an abortion in New Zealand.
Thanks for reminding me Emma, living here, I had completely forgotten about that anachronism. And thank goodness Judith Collins’ Care of Children Act 2004 was opposed,
As to my previous point,hopefully with more clarity. lowering the age of sexual consent without also lowering this age of parental consent required for medical/dental treatment could end up alienating more people from treatment related to pregnancy/ delivery, residual complications of termination and other sexual health issues. At the very least, these ages should correspond.
-
into the age of consent debate isn’t something I’ve got a clear plan for. It just seems worth noting.
Duly noted, I appreciate your candor, and I agree that the notion that people are better off being completely protected from dangerous things needs to be challenged, within reason, as for rugby, let me tell you Ben, rugby hurts and I’d be fully in favour of raising the minimum age on that. Though I get the gist of what you’re saying, foisting such a discriminatory approach onto sexual legislation seems potentially hazardous and fraught with deceit. The kids who are doing it already will continue to do it under the radar, whichever way the numbers go. And as you said one’s parentage will remain 95% of the determination of how a child will turn out.
-
Up Front: It's Complicated, in reply to BenWilson,
Thanks Ben, I’m sensing you may be a Brave New World fan. and rather than being colored, as in your case, by a missed opportunity in a bar at 14, my motivation here is Chlamydia, God bless her soul, and the requisite urethra swabs at 17, so the law or my understanding of it was never the issue for me as much as my own naivety and freaking pain.
but the possibility of a lower age for first period in which sex is legally possible. In fact,
My only issue is that the potential parent be legally in a position to handle all outcomes, As Emma mentioned we have creches, and welfare, and I probably should have mentioned it in my reply to Emma, darn it, if I’m not a little slow; but if say a mother doesn’t want to leave her child in the capable hands of the creche, say she wants to spend 24 hours a day with her child? Or say she wants to work full time and leave her child in day care, is there legal recourse to do so if she’s under 16? It’s nice to have safety nets but it strikes me as more egalitarian to have the right to choose. Sorry to harp on about this aspect. I have very little against lowering the age of sexual consent if young parents are accorded the same rights 16 year olds currently have, it’s just that laws actually make a lot of sense to me as is. Obviously were the age of sexual consent reduced I imagine that pregnancy would probably end up being one of the lesser concerns, but it seems remiss to jump into anything without first ensuring you’re not opening a hundred new cracks for people to fall through. Also I sense ancillary prickliness in reducing the age at which someone can be employed fulltime.
In fact, we do have that already as has come up earlier in the debate. But the conditions under which it’s possible could be made clearer.
Yeah it was news to me too, and yes definitely.
-
Thanks for your reply Emma
No, I understand that, that’s why I asked for clarification on your earlier comment. I’d assumed you were talking about teenagers. You appear to be talking about children.
Actually what set me off was Ben’s 7 year old learning to swim, it could have just been a random anecdote, but having followed the thread I took it as an analogue to this discussion, in the context of his previous posts. And as such no I’m not not terrifically happy with the example I provided either. I didn’t really want to go there.
Age of consent laws are not contraceptives. They can’t, and very obviously don’t, stop under-age people having babies. So in a decent society we provide things like creches in high schools, and training allowances for people on the DPB.
It’s these types of things that makes our country what it should be. Of course I understand that there are still underage pregnancies, as I mentioned it seems right that a number of important minimum legal ages correspond at 16. if for nothing more than to discourage the majority.
-
Sorry the editing period ran out before I finished my final paragraph:
Its parents, and if its parents cannot, the state. Because a child is not a punishment, it’s a human being.
With that sentiment I can’t agree more, so I feel the child whose parents are unable to legally leave school or take on full time work would be unfairly deprived
I also failed to remove this in time:
but I recently encountered a mother who referred to her child as ‘an experiment’ and so at this juncture I’m deeply concerned about how is he going to feel about that kind of attitude once he develops language faculties .
in response to:
No. No, they’re really not.
And I believe my point there was that, without question, there are certainly many who regard birth as less serious than death, I guess on that issue I’m something of fundamentalist.
OK, I’ve stopped responding now. not to the thread, just to that reply. And I’m not having a go Emma, I’m attempting to make a genuine contribution.
-
Up Front: It's Complicated, in reply to Emma Hart,
Emma, thanks for your reply, as I understand it Ben was flirting with the idea of removing the age of sexual consent, but the age for medical treatment without consent as I linked to is 16, if we have a nine year old legally able to consent to sex who then becomes pregnant, who makes the decision to have an abortion or any other related treatment? it’s a genuine question that yes I guess I am seriously asking, it seems to me we can’t rejig just one law without reorganizing the whole gambit.
Similarly with provisions for the children, as I posted in my previous post, children can’t leave school, leave home, get married or hold full time employment until they’re 16. So the state takes care of the child. I am not against a welfare state, but I recently encountered a mother who referred to her child as ‘an experiment’ and so at this juncture I’m deeply concerned about how is he going to feel about that kind of attitude once he develops language faculties . As you say:
Its parents, and if its parents cannot, the state. Because a child is not a punishment, it’s a human being.
So hypothetically how does the child in your example benefit from laws that would enable their parents to give birth to them without allowing them to leave school (quality time) or hold down full time employment (provide for them)?
-
Thanks for your response Ben. I obviously agree that we’re not socially ready to lower the age but I also readily agree that that our society has created a perverse outcome in this regard, ideologically I feel we’re on the same page.
I think death is a far more serious consequence than impregnation
Are these not of equal seriousness, polar almost? pregnancy is reversible, but who’s to make that decision, and who’s to provide for that child if that decision is not made, if the preventions fail.
Unlike swimming, Nothing too much is required to grasp the ins and outs of sex, lovemaking yes, but again, so much of that revolves around empathy, communication and sensitivity to another’s needs, partly innate and partly hinging on a dose of maturity.
As an aside, ours is a perverse society, but by degrees, here in China the age of consent is 14 for male and female, the age of marriage is 22 for males, 20 for females, which strikes me as more perverse and more prone to exploitation, in this environment.
My main reason for thinking that legal ages for sex still make some sense and are practical is around the danger of predation
I’m not sure about this. As I see it the danger of predation persists, predators being what they are regardless of the age of the prey or the legality of what they’re doing. In a sense I feel that many but not all predators are largely a product of this perversity of society you mentioned above, the perversity that the rule of law in a way propagates. I also feel that this hands-on education you espouse could largely empower children against predation. It’s this empowerment, the right of children to make up their own minds about things relating directly to them, that seems sorely lacking in this world;
As long as we continue to deny our children the right to make these and other types of fundamental decisions about their own lives it seems like a pretty big ask to expect them to be able to decide whether they’re ready to procreate.