That video is possibly the worst thing I have ever seen.
Children can consent!
Let kids make their own choices, OK?
We also limit the ability even of adults when we do not believe they can understand what they are consenting to. In an obvious case, retards are cannot consent because they don't understand what they're doing. When a normal adult is put into a contract in which they did not reasonably have the ability to understand, that contract is typically thrown out in a court of law.
For example, if a doctor convinces an adult into "consenting" to a life changing surgery without that person reasonably understanding it, they didn't truly consent.
It is PERHAPS possible that there is a child somewhere positioned at some point in time that does or did actually have both the knowledge and practical understanding of sex to have informed consent. Because children obviously lack knowledge, and almost certainly lack the ability to understand as a result both of their immaturity and lack of knowledge, it is reckless to say that they consent to certain things(like contracts or sex).
The argument that development, knowledge, and maturity are sliding scales and so arbitrary and subjective is divisive and immoral. It is to say that there can be a circumstance in which it is wrong, but that because it is difficult to "tell precisely" the exact moment when it's okay that all should be permitted. It is a fallacy.
The arbitrary ages that legal systems come up with are numbers given as a cut off to reasonably ensure that rape and gross violations of rights and consent occur as infrequently as possible.
In the first case, that is the same tired appeal to moral relativism that the immoral use to justify anything at all. It is a weak and useless argument.
In the second case, children are not little adults. Maturity comes from the innumerable pieces of knowledge and experiences that are accrued each year, and true understanding can come only from the knowledge and experiences that happen over the course of many years. It is, for example, unreasonable to assume a child can truly understand what it means to die even if you explain in totality the state of non-existence and all its ramifications. They will not be able to make an informed consent about death. True understanding of it only comes from years of knowledge, experience, and thought.
Understanding of sex comes from years of experience with boundaries, intimacy, relationships, power, and more.
@Sudononymous @matrix @mactonite@neckbeard.xyz
It's a bonding act where if you cum inside you get preggers. It really isn't hard to understand.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190401193459/https://tomocarroll.wordpress.com/2013/10/06/a-less-impaired-vision-of-sexuality/
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J151v01n03_02
“Assessing competency to consent to sexual activity in the cognitively impaired population”, by a certain Carrie Hill Kennedy. A “Sexual Consent and Education Assessment” instrument was used, with two dimensions, “sexual knowledge” and “safety practices”, indicating the ability to make safe decisions. Those judged competent had, on average, an IQ of 65 and an adaptive behaviour age of 9.4 years. Those judged incompetent had average IQ 46 and adaptive behaviour age 6.7 years. This would suggest, at an intermediate position, that competence is achieved at around 8.2 years, and IQ 55.
Morality is relative. Which is why you think child marriage is immoral while history universally disagrees
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J056v16n02_03
The rest of it is just vague unprovable garbage. You can tell them anything you want, and they can fully understand it but they lack this nebulous "experience". If it has an actual effect, then you can actually show it, instead of you just arbitrarily picking what's "informed" or not. Why should you need to be 18? Why not 25 or 16? What do you actually have in reality?
Another thing is that you're trying to hold the positions that "they need to have 'informed' consent" but also that you can force them to do anything you want for their own good, but also that they aren't allowed to consent. "Consent matters, so they are not allowed to say yes" is logically contradictory. But also made useless since you think you can force them into anything for their own good anyway.
