Anyone that doesn’t want kids being sexualized is a fascist, and also this warning sticker at a chain restaurant is proof of the real problems facing our country right now.
I think that's still not good, but it's nowhere near as fucked up as a 40-year-old marrying a 14-year-old.
@dave
Why are you against a young marriage?
Don't you think it's better then letting them collect debt in uni, let them get ""tricked"" by chad and then force them to 9-5 till they end up on antidepressants?
@dave @LukeAlmighty Do they just idle for years and years? Why?
@applejack @dave
This is the hardest part, that poasters will never understand.
Hormones start raging at the age of 15. That is primary school. That means, that the girl cannot possibly marry the first guy, till 3 years later. Fuck that, she cannot even talk about it.
But 3 years later, she is already in high school, with a random set of people and away from her family. And this "friends group randomization" won't end up till she's 25.
@applejack
Do you see any logic in what I just described @dave , or does it all seem to you as a bunch of nonsense?
- Statutory rape laws always need close-in-age exceptions (Romeo and Juliet Laws), otherwise you end up in weird situations, which have happened, where a 19-year-old sleeping with a 17-year-old gets put on the sex offender registry, when their relationship would have been fine if they were 18 and 20. Or you end up with two 15-year-olds sleeping with each other, and both getting charged with statutory rape, because they were both under the age of consent. This has also happened.
- As a rule your age limits should be drawn around actual criminality, not just seediness. Statutory rape is a serious charge that if convicted can easily ruin your life, and the punishment should fit the crime.
- Unlike most crimes which operate off of a "mens rea" (guilty mind) standard, which requires that you knew what you were doing, statutory rape laws tend to operate on a "strict liability" standard, which means that even if you had reason to believe the person you were sleeping with was of age (for example, you met in a bar, which requires showing ID, which implies that everyone in that bar is of age), you can still be tried and sentenced even if your belief that they were of age was reasonable.
- I don't like this, I think it should be mens rea like anything else, meaning if you had reason to believe they were of age, then you shouldn't be able to be tried. So if she looked old enough to get into the bar, and she's telling you she's 18, then you shouldn't be liable if it turns out she was lying.
@dave @applejack
I meant the part, where women cannot possibly marry, since they are already on the way to get their "promissing careers"
A lot of Mormon women go to college with the expectation that they're going to find and marry a guy, and he's going to be the breadwinner. I think it's the same (to a lesser degree) in normal colleges; women go hoping they'll find someone to marry.
Women do get sucked up into careerism and ultimately ending up unhappy because they missed out on building a family, and that's sad, but I don't think that's the universal college experience.
@dave @applejack
But thanks.
I think I made my point now. If you feel like there is something I should consider, you have my full attention.
@dave @applejack
Not entierly.
My point is more like:
-If they want a 4 kid family, they should start at 20 tops.
-They cannot start a family at 20 because thy have no security.
-Traditional system of security (Marrige) has been made impossible, until either one or both people have income. This doesn't happen till they are 25, because of the education system.
And at 25, woman is already in debt AND unable to have 4 kids.
It is a complex trap, but the result is the same. Women start considering marrige as an option by the time, the entire concept is pointless.
@dave @applejack
The difference is, that I am not saying "stupid woman chose bad", but "all good choices women used to have are now gone".
