Peter,

You seem to be tying sexual readiness merely with onset of puberty, but psychological maturity is absolutely vital, and I'm sorry but young children today at ages 12, 13, 14, 15 etc. simply do not have that psychological or social maturity, regardless of the appearance of some physical markers of puberty.

Now, granted individual people may mature faster than others but the law has to be drawn somewhere, and if you ask me 16 is a bit low. Frankly, I highly doubt most 16, 17 or 18 year olds are really ready for the full implications of leading a sexually active life. Gratification of sexual impulses does not maturity make.

The potential risks of sexually transmitted diseases, including the increased risk that females incur such as risks for various cancers with multiple sexual partners, and the full social cost of bearing children coupled with the fact that our children do not complete their education and begin work (hence being financially able to care for offspring) until much later than in bygone eras.

It is just rubbish that if a girl begins menstruation or a boy gets hair under his arm, then that makes them ready for sexual relationships.

"It is just rubbish that if a girl begins menstruation or a boy gets hair under his arm, then that makes them ready for sexual relationships."

That may be so, and I know lots of people in their 40s and 50s who quite plainly are not ready for the psychological or social consequences of having sex. On the other hand, the fact that a person has reached puberty doesn't necessarily prove they are *not* ready for sexual relationships either.

But that's not the issue, which is, whether those in favour of making it a criminal offence have been able to give reason justifying it.

It is no answer to say the law must be drawn somewhere. That is what is in issue.

You say 16 is too young, but why should people who don't agree with you be imprisoned just because you hold strong opinions about other people's sex lives?

You still haven't answered the crucial questions: why this age and not that, and what is the underlying criterion of which age is supposed to be a surrogate indicator?

Remember, the question is not whether or not you approve, since no-one asked you to use police, magistrates and prisons to tell other people what values they should live by. It's whether you have demonstrated a harm that necessarily justifies criminal penalties, and so far, no-one has. You(z) have just confirmed that we are dealing with laws of sexual morality, not child protection.

Peter,
Once, quite a while ago, I was a young woman/girl and I thought I was mature at 14. In many ways I was on my own, no protective parents and so forth to guide me. I speak from experience that the kind of men and women that i had to avoid, those who thought to take advantage of my younger self, were seriously twisted. Street smarts, and a minimilistic amout of family protection helped keep me from feeling the full impact of my youthful stupidity.

On the other hand, tell me how you would propose to ascertain a young person's maturity? A doctors letter, a peek, what the hell are you going on about. The legal age is 16, and that is that. Get over it, if you or anyone else chooses to act on what you think might constitute an age of maturity, if it differs from the legal age then take the consequenses of the full wieght of the law.

Actually the age of consent for male to male type intercourse is 18 in Qld and the same applies, break the law and toughen up and take the penalty.

PS my 3 daughters were prepeared to wait - thank goodness for the fellas they liked in thier earlier teens are nothing like the men they married.

Hmm Peter,
Perhaps you could explain why you think the age of consent should be lower, or redefined by someone like youself.

The speed limits on roads are set without seeking your permission, the age of voting did not need your consent either I presume. Some laws are set without seeking your approval, I hope you realise. Sorry to burst your illusion.

Now tell us why exactly you seem to think that the age of consent should be set at some level of maturity that you dictate.

I think you are out of touch with reality, you are not talking about grey areas where people might have to justify themselves to the legal fraternity. From what I understand from your comments, you are calling for an abolishment of a set age of consent.

That is offensive, outrageous and twisted.

I didn't only mention psychological harm, Peter, I also mentioned the physiological risks.

Why 16? Presumably because our legislators have decided that a greater proportion of risk lies with a larger number of children before 16, than after.

As for scientific proof of harm of early sexual activity in underage children: (*mumbles* I can't believe I'm spending my precious time googling the scientific literature for the medical equivalent that the earth truly is flat)...

"Early age at first intercourse (OR=4.3; 2.1-9.0 for age < 16 vs 24+) and early age at first birth (OR = 5.0; 1.8-14.2 for 9ge < 16 vs 24+) were associated with increased risk of cervical cancer; these effects were independent of one another." Bosch et. al. (1992) "Risk factors for cervical cancer in Colombia and Spain." In _International Journal of Cancer_ 52(5):750-758.

"Child sexual abuse has unfortunately been ignored and minimised by psychiatry until recently. The current evidence strongly indicates that it is a common event which is highly likely to cause both short-and long-term harm to its victims." Bill Glaser&#8204; (1998). "Psychiatry and paedophilia: A major public health issue." In _Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry_ 32(2):162-167.

Children are children Peter. Do you have children and are you raising them Peter? Do you have a daughter Peter? If so, were you regularly raising her and teaching her skills to protect herself at the age of 14yrs, 15yrs and 16yrs from older boys and men?

Do you have any concept of the suicide rates relating to under age sex as the legislation stands today. 18 and 19yr olds commit suicide when a teenager discovers his teenage partner has rejected or played up on him/her. Many of these kids cannot deal with sexual pressures in their everyday lives at a young age. Some are able to deal with sex in their lives between 16-18yrs; however most kids I meet slide into depression as a result of themselves still growing developing and changing mentally.

Do you realise how easy it would be for thousands of Australian middle aged filthy creeps to take a young girl or boy's innocence [14-16yrs]if the age of consent was lowered? IE these are children not adults. Teenagers are teenagers: not adults who are able to think out consequences. 18/19 yr old males and females are still maturing mentally and starting to think of consequences of behaviour. Disregard the age group of 14-16yrs.

You obviously have no idea of the 'nightmare and hellish mess' any proposed lowering of age of consent would cause within Australia.