Quote from dawesdust_12 :

No. 16 is the age of Consent in Canada. The "2 year gap" dealie comes into effect basically when you're doing the dirty with a minor.. so you can't have some old ass dude pumping some 16 yearold.

Lol 'pumping' sounds sick when an old man is put into the equation

well, it is ... but one can't generalize it. One of my friends is 22, and her now fiancée is 37. They got together when she was a mere 16

And you know what they say, "jailbait" is more pleasurable!

Correct word is Paedophile, why can't anybody understand this? It is NOT PEDOFILE!

Quote from BlueFlame :

Correct word is Paedophile, why can't anybody understand this? It is NOT PEDOFILE!

Well if you want to get narky, being attracted to teenagers is not Paedophilia, it is Ephebophilia.

Yep because teenagers are not kids.

ah who cares, its not like any of you guys would do that anyway


exept er1c......


:hidesbehi

Quote from BlueFlame :

Correct word is Paedophile, why can't anybody understand this? It is NOT PEDOFILE!

semantics. You're still banging a 15 year-old, regardless of spelling

Quote from Timo1992 :

Yep because teenagers are not kids.

Well, pedophilia is technically being sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children. I think that whether or not someone has hit puberty or not should determine whether it's illegal to do the dirty with them or not. If they're old enough to get pregnant, then I don't see why it should be illegal. Though there should still be a minimum age because some children might get some genetic disorder or something that causes them to go through puberty way earlier or something like that.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

If they're old enough to get pregnant, then I don't see why it should be illegal.

You know theres cases of 9yo and 10yo girls getting pregnant, right?

Klutch, the voice of reason.

but hose are gypsies

old enough to bleed... old enough to breed...

so they say... lol

Quote from wheel4hummer :

Well, paedophilia is technically being sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children. I think that whether or not someone has hit puberty or not should determine whether it's illegal to do the dirty with them or not. If they're old enough to get pregnant, then I don't see why it should be illegal. Though there should still be a minimum age because some children might get some genetic disorder or something that causes them to go through puberty way earlier or something like that.

Fixed.

Slightly gone off topic, but yeah.... totally... old enough to bleed, old enough to breed.... so 'they' say.

Quote from Klutch :

You know theres cases of 9yo and 10yo girls getting pregnant, right?

You know it's useful to read ALL of someone's post, right?

Quote from wheel4hummer :

Though there should still be a minimum age because some children might get some genetic disorder or something that causes them to go through puberty way earlier or something like that.

Quote from Klutch :

You know theres cases of 9yo and 10yo girls getting pregnant, right?

Dont forget the 5 year old from Peru....

Quote from wheel4hummer :

Though there should still be a minimum age because some children might get some genetic disorder or something that causes them to go through puberty way earlier or something like that.

The thing about genetic disorders is that you don't "get" them all of a sudden - a genetic disorder is, as the term implies, with a person from the start. Sex doesn't alter your DNA.

Im going to throw this out there.

But what happens if say a 14 year old girl rapes a 18 year old guy? Whos at fault?

Quote from AstroBoy :

But what happens if say a 14 year old girl rapes a 18 year old guy? Whos at fault?

Systemise the routine, Humanise the exception: The law doesn't cover this scenario, should it ever occur It would not be automatic rape, she'd have to be tried by jury. Given her age, probably just by a judge in a childrens court.

The law is a framework, it's judges and jurries who are responsible for dealing out misjustice.

Quote from Astroboy :

But what happens if say a 14 year old girl rapes a 18 year old guy? Whos at fault?

Rape is rape. The rapist is at fault, no matter how "out of the norm" the situation might be. Physiological manifestations of sexual arousal is not necessarily a sign of consent and after all there are various forms of rape.

Quote from Becky Rose :

The law is a framework, it's judges and jurries who are responsible for dealing out misjustice.

One of the best relevant examples.

Quote from Linked Article :

A 15-year-old girl has been arrested for taking nude photographs of her self and posting them on the Internet, police said.
...
She has been charged with sexual abuse of children, possession of child pornography and dissemination of child pornography.

Oh the irony.

Quote from wheel4hummer :

You know it's useful to read ALL of someone's post, right?

Since when is girls getting their periods early a genetic disorder?

yeah from girlfriends to lawsuits

Quote :

A 15-year-old girl has been arrested for taking nude photographs of her self and posting them on the Internet, police said.
...
She has been charged with sexual abuse of children, possession of child pornography and dissemination of child pornography.

well I guess thats handled differently from country to country. I guess here her parents would be prosecuted in some way, and the people who looked at it.

I remember a case where a man was arrested for ownership of child pornography, till he pointed out that the naked kid on the pics was he himself some 30 years ago. Dunno how it ended exactly, but he was set free.

Wait... So I am not allowed to have pictures of myself, and when I was a child?

I swear the laws get more retarded....

No, that makes you a pedophile.