Rose, what a sweet and utterly disarming response to my verbal dyspepsia.

However I would point out that the key issue here is not academic; you do yourself, and your readers, a disservice by obscuring your message with poor usage of the language. It is like hearing your favourite piece of music being murdered by poor musicians. You know that the beauty is there somewhere, but it is temporarily inaccessible.

Just for the record, I haven't been to university either. This is not a crusade to keep the language pure, whatever that might mean. But if we don't take proper care of it, its value will diminish. The reason I took a swipe at you was not to lecture you, but to point out that people who use words professionally should take better care of their tools of trade.

And since you quote Khalil Gibran, take another look through The Prophet, and bear in mind that he wrote it in English. Then remind yourself that he was born in poverty, didn't have any formal education, and didn't start learning the language until he was twelve.

The age of consent is an issue that I have pondered many times over recent years.

It wasn't until the age of 26 that I accepted my sexual orientation as a gay man, lost my virginity and then shortly after fell in love with a man nearly 10 years my senior. That relationship lasted about 8 years.

Now some 10 years later and one year into my second same-sex relationship it is now with a man who is now 22, some 13 years my junior.

In neither case was the age difference between my partner and me a concern to either of us. The important part was that there was mutual love, attraction and respect.

Now, over the years I have met a number of people who have engaged in consensual same-sex relations, where one party was near (either side of) the legal age of consent and the other party was several years or more above it. In all of these cases, to the best of my knowledge, both parties engaged in sex more than willingly and definitely without coercion.

Over the years I have had conversations with males under the age of consent who had frequently sought sex with men well above their own age. They told me they did this because that is what they wanted and often went to lengths to achieve this.

I believe sexually mature teenagers should be consulted to determine what is best for them. Clearly this is not a sitation where "one size fits all" as we all mature sexually and emotionally at different ages.

My 2c.

Pete,

I wasn't quoting Kellog Allbran,it was "Anonymous" who wrote Desiderata a few hundred years ago. I appreciate your point of view re: English, but you still haven't uttered a syllable on the subject at hand, which quite frankly cracks me up.

Mikey,

There will always be young people that seek sex with older people. The younger person's desire for sex isn't really the issue. When the age gap is HUGE and the young person is barely 16 then it really is the responsibility of the much older person to be more selflessly motivated. Young people (particularly young men) are easy pickings and emotionally impressionable - and as a love match, the balance of power is uneven. What we can do, and what we should do is up to our own conscience and values systems. I wouldn't feel overly proud of myself for bedding a sixteen year old boy - although there is no question that I could, if I wanted to.

Rose

After reading Rose's article and comments posted regarding her use of the English language, my own 2c is that it is a very well rounded article that pushes no particular political, moral or religious barrow (refreshing change) Well written and articulate, certainly, whose occasional grammatical slips do not obscure the message and do not make it sloppy. Rose's comments back to the particular critic are extremely entertaining. Stop trying to score points off her Peter, you may be more literate, but not half as witty and clever with words as she is. Which is why she is using the tools of her trade very well indeed.
Di

Omnes,

the age of consent debate is meaningless outside of its context - marriage!

Nothing can regulate sexual activity outside of (societal & or personal) norms relating to sexuality & marital fidelity. Illicit / illegal sex will always be found outside of faithful monogamous heterosexual marriage.

What a crock Reality Check, so i suppose that as gay persons aren't allowed to legally marry, that means the age debate doesn't even come into it for you. What next, a diatribe about gays? Or do you support the fact that they should be allowed to marry and therefore save themselves the damnation of illegal/illicit sex? Remember, the easiest way to make criminals out of ordinary people is to change legislation. Hitler made it an art form in his day.