Serious United Kingdom Age of Consent Discussion, where do we draw the line?

Designates a thread as a serious discussion

Soygoy

I will fight for /anthro/
I'm having a little bit of a hard discussion with @Fortuna right now about UK's Age of Consent laws, it's 16 but in our country, the age of majority applies more. However, Fortuna disagrees and is acting like he knows better over the situation. Being a resident of the UK, I've always assumed that the age of consent is 16, but the age of majority is 18 and a 16 year old can't have sex with a 42 year old, here is what Fortuna has to say:
1729972482587.png

You can find this conversation on this profile: https://soyjak.blog/index.php?members/cherek-dauvin.1442/#profile-post-comment-30747

Theres been cases of people like Lionmaker, an infamous Minecraft youtuber exposed for sexting a 16 year old girl who many believe to be a pedophile. Some people even think that sexting a 17 year old is pedophilic, the hard line is 18 and always has been 18, but you are telling me that the age of consent only applies and the age of majority means nothing in the equation?

I think Fortuna is wrong, but I want someone to help me further this discussion.
The age of majority applies, a 16 year old can court with an 18 year old and a 17 year old, maybe a 19 year old? Maybe not? But definitely not a 20 year old or a 42 year old. But Fortuna thinks that a 42 year old totally not a pedophile can fuck a 16 year old, I think he is wrong.
 
Oh so people don't actually think he's a pedo, they just want people to think hes a pedo.
Fucking weird but okay.
He did sext a 16 year old, he just said he didn't LE know that he was sexting a 16 year old, and there's no proof he did afaik. Maybe he actually did or something IDK, I hate him either way so I never bothered to look into.
 
Where am I advocating for it?
You're saul goodmanning your way around the situation to say that it's okay for someone above the age of 18 in my country to have sex with a 16 year old even though it's morally wrong. I had no idea if it was legally okay but it's morally ireprehensible o algo
 
You're saul goodmanning your way around the situation to say that it's okay for someone above the age of 18 in my country to have sex with a 16 year old even though it's morally wrong. I had no idea if it was legally okay but it's morally ireprehensible o algo
I think you mean irreprehensible. And I said nothing about the morality of it. I just said that it's legal in your country. I don't get why you're trying to act otherwise.
 
I think you mean irreprehensible. And I said nothing about the morality of it. I just said that it's legal in your country. I don't get why you're trying to act otherwise.
Because if its legal then...
  1. I had no idea and some grammar nazi russian o algo knows more about my country than I do.
  2. Basil did nothing wrong.
  3. Not that it matters anyways because the site operates on US law o algo.
 
Because if its legal then...
  1. I had no idea and some grammar nazi russian o algo knows more about my country than I do.
  2. Basil did nothing wrong.
  3. Not that it matters anyways because the site operates on US law o algo.
So you refuse to admit it's legal because you don't want to admit you were wrong?
 
So you refuse to admit it's legal because you don't want to admit you were wrong?
I looked it up and theres some weird misconceptions. Apparently sexting is illegal if you're above 18 and sext a 16 year old but you can still have sex with a 16 year old which just seems weird.
 
I looked it up and theres some weird misconceptions. Apparently sexting is illegal if you're above 18 and sext a 16 year old but you can still have sex with a 16 year old which just seems weird.
Also it's illegal for a teacher or someone "in a position of power" to have sex with a 16 year old. Which might aswell be every adult in the country.
 
Back
Top