continued from last post....

The problem is today’s complex society is putting us out of synch with biology. We wonder why adolescents have raging hormones at 16, then 20 years later women need IVF because of fertility problems. The problem is nature gave us raging hormones at 16 because that's when we're suppose to reproduce.

I guess my hope is that a better understanding of history would mean less moral panic about underage sex and the age of consent and a little more reason.

Posted by DavidJS, Wednesday, March 23, 2005 8:01:26 AM

"In Victorian England the age of consent for girls was 13. Books by the likes of Cyril Pearl or any number of credible historians of that era recount the prevalence of prostitution and paedophilia combined with an ignorance about sex and sexuality. The Victorian era was, of course, a time when learning about sex was confined to the "better classes". The ignorant masses weren't supposed to know. But that wasn't exactly good for society."

Paedophilia was a mass phenomena in Victorian London. It was not illegal so it quickly became commercialized and widespread. Similarly as the eastern bloc collapsed, child pornography exploded as a mechanism for obtaining hard currency. As the US govt. arm-twisted varying degrees of moral sanity, various nations developed or left loop-holes.

Child pornography featuring 14 year old 'actors' having sex without adults (participating on film) was the next step etc. The average child pornographer was simply a businessman thriving in what had become a sea of utra-capitalism. The people making cookery programmes in Budapest etc. also made child pornography. No crisis of conscience being apparent.

Internet content providers in more restricted economic markets could label the same 'loop-hole' child pornography as 18 and invariably get away with it. The wicked people usually live right next door to 'moral' people. They drive the same cars, drink the same beer, they look the same. Moral people do not actively sell morality. Paedophiles, pimps, child pornographers are however effectively a 'special interest' lobby.

They exploit circumstance to leverage advantage. Men, lawyers, accountants, with their secretaries taking notes, would meet to discuss how to sell and make child pornography. It was legal so they just did it. They did not view themselves as criminals, they felt they were escaping the Soviet era and discovering 'freedom'.

"It seems that the average age for starting to have sex has gone down since sex education and sexual liberation in the 1960s. Does anyone have any hard statistics which shows this and if so won't more sex education lower the age even more. Children may be physically able to drive when they are 12 (just visit a farm) but are we going to start driver education at 12 years of age as well"

Educating boys and girls in gender specific schools has a marked effect on limiting unwanted sexual behaviours. Children are under enormous pressure (in Europe and the USA) to have sex.

Sexual misconduct at mixed schools is far more widespread than single sex schools. Most sexual assaults in mixed schools are swept under the carpet or ignored or not reported.

Being sexually assaulted 'is part of growing up' these days. It is difficult to prosecute pupuls for sexual assault etc. when the people in charge are also doing it.

In parts of Europe it is illegal to terminate paedophile teachers. Similarly child pornography and the medical profession, nursing etc. are other difficult areas to resolve.

Cadiz, I'd love to hear your evidence for this.
Anecdotal evidence tells me precisely the opposite. When you sit with guys in class day in and day out you are far less likely to want to have sex with them, than if they are the forbidden fruit kept mysterious, distant and therefore very attractive.
Familiarity breeds contempt, or hadn't you heard?
After all, the number of kids in single sex schools now (particularly girls) is much higher than it was in the 70s, when I was at achool, and apparently underage sex is going up. How do you reconcile these two things?
My daughters, both at a co-ed state high school, are quite startled by some of the behaviour of some of their single sex, private school friends.

Anne,

You are the one who needs to take a reality check. Look at what your liberal sex education has achieved: huge increases in STIs, huge increase in infertility, unwanted pregnancies which make it difficult for girls to complete education, increased abortions and the resulting post-abortion trauma, increased family and marriage break-down etc etc.

Liberal sex education has had its turn and has been found wanting. Valueless and clueless sex educators have been hammering kids with their values free anything-goes sexual fantasies for at least 15 years now and look where it has got us. It has made things an order of magnitude worse and it will take several generations to recover.

Not surprising really. What would a lesbian who was once married and is now divorced, know about real, lasting intimate relationships? Answer: Stuff all.

Schools are highly sexualized places. The average male teenager will try his luck out on any girl whether he likes her or not.

When condoms are provided by nurses to 11 and 12 year olds (in Britain) they do not usually use them on older girls.

Vulnerable girls are leveraged to have sex by boys who are empowered by school issued condoms.

Sexual abuse and harassment are a routine fact of life in British schools. Some are more notorious than others.

Many school boys develop a taste for downloading child pornography at their schools. I suspect the same phenomena is common to New Zealand and Australia.