you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]trident765[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

What is your view? Do you even have one? You seem to keep changing direction in order to negate my comments.

[–]IMissPorn 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I do think 18 is too high, 16 is more or less reasonable, but a bigger problem is when there are no exceptions made for relationships between peers close in age. A decent percent of young teens are always gonna fool around, it's absolutely expected and normal, even if we wish they wouldn't. So if no official exception exists, that just means the law is ignored and authorities mostly look the other way. Laws that are widely ignored are obviously bad laws.

[–]trident765[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

You seem incapable of thinking broadly. You answer the specific comment, but your comments are inconsistent with each other. For example, in one comment you appeal to statistics, and when I doubted the utility of statistics, you say statistics don't matter and start making some tangential argument that has nothing to do with the original point I made. You are a task-oriented thinker.

[–]IMissPorn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks. But you misunderstood. I'm not saying statistics don't matter, as such. Outcomes matter, and statistics attempt to measure that. But I'm saying if the current statistics don't look like you hoped they would, that's not mainly because they have been manipulated by "blue haired feminists", and more because society itself has changed completely. (Whether or not you want to blame blue haired feminists for that also is up to you.)