Jump to content

Talk:Age of consent/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Hehehehe, that is so funny!!! :-D

While there are no specific age of consent laws in the Antarctic, in the unlikely event of a minor engaging in sexual activity, under the Antarctic Treaty, scientists and support staff stationed there may be subject to the laws of the party of which they are nationals. Other visitors to the continent may need to follow the laws of the country in which their expedition is organized, or the country from which it departs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.235.145.19 (talk) 13:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


Mexico's age of consent is wrong, from the Código Penal Federal http://info4.juridicas.unam.mx/ijure/tcfed/8.htm?s=

(very liberal translation, as I don't know English legaleeze)

Artículo 262. Al que tenga cópula con persona mayor de doce años y menor de dieciocho, obteniendo su consentimiento por medio de engaño, se le aplicará de tres meses a cuatro años de prisión.

Whoever copulates obtaining consent through deceit with a person between twelve and eighteen years old will be imprisioned between three months and four years.

And...

Artículo 266. Se equipara a la violación y se sancionará con la misma pena:

I. Al que sin violencia realice cópula con persona menor de doce años de edad;

It will be considered rape and will be punished under the same terms:

I. Whoever who copulates [even without violence] with a person under twelve years old.

So age of consent in Mexico is twelve years old. --Duopixel (talk) 06:06, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

No you idiot! It's 18. If you're under 18 you cannot consent to anything, I know I live in Mexico, so I'm quite sure of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.150.79.251 (talk) 22:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Canada Needs To be Changed on Map

I submitted a earlier .bmp version, that was removed. Understandable since it was low quality. But Canada has raised it's Age of Consent to 16 years old (for all non-anal sex...anal sex is still 18.

The map needs to see all of Canada coloured green. Young, Conservative, Canadian, Capitalist 03:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Pornography

An interesting aspect of the AoC topic that appears to not be addressed is the fact that in many places the legal threshold for appearing in porn is 18, and this threshold also extends to the legal age of viewing such material (and in some places the age limit is as high as 21). In many areas, possessing and viewing material that features people under 18 is illegal. Yet as indicated in this article and others, in many of these same jurisdictions, AoC and/or legal marriage age can be much lower. I've started a section on this, but it needs an "informed hand" to make sure it's correct, and that sources are added. 23skidoo 19:37, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like fun :) - Only thing is I've shifted it to the "other concerns" section as this is a subject that we don't want to include in the "Ages of consent in ...." subpages due to length. Along with prostitution, it just confuses the core issue. --Monotonehell 19:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

missing data

Theres no entries concerning age of consent as reference to diplomats ,embassies,religious institutions,foreign armies abroad,or ships at at sea.Does anybody have data on these ?. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.48.46.141 (talk) 15:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

I guess if anyone does have such info then that could be added to the "ages of consent in..." subpages under the appropriate country/state. IIRC there's something about mariners under one of the UK dependencies on the Europe page. --Monotonehell 23:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Change in Canada (infact page requires a detailed section for motivations for differing ages)

Similar changes in the law in other Anglo-saxon majority countries has had little effect on Pimps and drug dealers or Priests who exploit young people.Interestingly the USA and Britain who have very similar cultural backgrounds tend to have a higher teenage pregnancy rate than European countries that have lower ages of consent.The only likely effect of this Bill ,for example,will be to stop responsible 25 year old accountants having sexual relations with young people .It will not stop those who already exploit young people,since they are already in breach of the law in many cases eg Pimps,18 year old criminals who care very little for unplanned pregnancies or the transmission of diseases.Increasing the age of consent tends to increase the devision between responsible adults and the young and limits the choice for the young and leaves room for exploiters to step in .One has to question the motivation for such a bill;has it been introduced to statisfy personnal religous views .Has it been introduced by overweight middle-aged men because they fear more attractive ethnic groups having sex ,when they themselves are to grotesque to be found attractive by young people.(The UK tightened their laws in the the 1950's,just before the influx of Blacks and Asians into the country).Of course this bill will not stop wealthy Canadians from going abroad in order to breach the new law and hence it is aimed at the poor.Canadians be Scared be very Scared,you will end up as USA ,high child murder rates ,largest consumer of porn. --The previous unsigned opinion was soapboxed by: |213.48.46.141|22:46, 4 July 2006

Proves my point http://www.unicef.org/media/files/ChildPovertyReport.pdf

Considering that most young people are introduced to drugs by their peer group ,and this is a major factor in sexual exploitation ; the close age exemption is rather irrational. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.48.46.141 (talk) 15:55, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

As I said before when this was brought up at Talk:Ages of consent in North America; the above text is entirely unsuitable for an encyclopedia, as it's unreferenced opinion. If however a reasoned and unbiased summary of the Child Poverty Report can be extracted that can be directly linked to Age of consent laws (ie not original research or speculation) then it should probably be included as part of Age of consent reform which examines the background of AoC laws. Rather than on any of the "Ages of consent in..." pages which are intended to be a fairly dry presentation of fact. Mostly for reasons of article size. (Also you may wish to create an account if you wish to participate in Wikipedia so you can be differentiated from all the vandalism that comes from your IP) --Monotonehell 23:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


If it is vandalism ,remove it.Anyway the Canadian process gives an opportunity to test the 'facts' in the main page, such as the reasons for an age of consent, in real time rather than second hand sources.For example the statement, 'The general moral philosophy behind age of consent laws is the assumed need for the protection of minors'is questionable since it does not protect minors against parental abuse;which is the main source of abuse.Also ages of consent when first introduced did not apply inside marriage.Hence if protection of minors is a factual reason then it seems odd that cultures with the same moral tradition have differing ages eg Europe.The debate in Canada may enlighten us on the reasons such as power ,social control etc.Hence 'soap boxing' provides an outlet to question the facts in the main page and hence wikipedia will present the true facts rather than regurgitated phrases from other sources,many of them written by interest groups .

Of course there is no clear link with age of consent and the child poverty report,but it does indicate that abuse (eg young pregnancies) are not less likely in those countries with higher AoC.

To say that there is a religous basis to age of consent is nonsense.Religions have been around for thousands of years without ages of consent.Ages of consent where introduced when religion was losing its control.However religion may be used to find support in changing the age of consent ,even though there is no real religious reason to have one.Religion controlled sexual behaviour through marriage ,therefore never needed an age of consent.So I think there is no religious basis;there is a political/social basis which may use religion for its own end. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.85.12.211 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:NOR WP:NPOV WP:V and understand that Wikpedia is not a forum for Original research. Any material that is currently presented in the article is up for editing, provided that it can be backed up with a reliable source. The majority of the text to which you refer is sourced from Dr Matthew Waites's book The Age of Consent: Young People, Sexuality and Citizenship. This is one of the few published works on the subject. A Wikipedia talk page is not the place to debate the subject of the article, rather a place to discuss how to present the current scholarly world view as best we can, via consensus. Anything that is to be presented must be backed up with a reference to an appropriate authority. --Monotonehell 07:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Where's it gone?

Where's the list gone, that used to be here, displaying the age of consent all over the world?? The picture is nice, but the list was way better!! - Soulslayer (from German Wikipedia) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.121.115.222 (talk) 10:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

Do you mean the table? See earlier discussion for why that was deleted. -- Avenue 11:40, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
If you mean the list of ages of consent, that became too large to keep all on one page and was split out to the articles listed under Age_of_consent#Ages_of_consent_in_various_countries. The table that Avenue mentions above was intended to be a summary of the list, but it soon became apparent that such a list would be very hard to keep synchronised with edits on the other pages, and that AoC information is far more complex than a table can relate. --Monotonehell 01:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Countries with an "unequal" age of sexual consent:

Countries that have higher age of consent provisions for same-sex relations than for heterosexual relations;

Countries with an “unequal” age of consent;

Bahamas (1991), Bermuda (1994), Chile (1998), Gibraltar (1993), Suriname (1944) and Vanuatu.

Countries with an “unequal” age of consent and are “under review”;

Bermuda, Gibraltar and South Africa.

Countries with an “unequal” age of consent that has been “invalidated” / “revoked” or “struck-down" by Courts, etc;

Hong Kong (2006), Portugal, South Africa and the USA (all jurisdictions) (2003)

Countries with an “unequal” age of consent that only applies to anal sex;

Cyprus (2002) - Woman to Boy sex 13 for anal sex (17 for all others)

Canada (1988) - 18 for anal sex, 14 for all non-anal sex

Queensland, Australia (1990) - 18 for anal sex, 16 for all non-anal sex

Notes; Brackets mean date of the “titled” age of consent came into force, No brackets means no information. The countries with an “unequal” age of consent that only applies to anal sex and not for all non-anal sex is equal regardless of gender and/or sexuality etc (Except for in regards to sexual behaviour). In addition, Greece has an age of consent that treat male-male sex the same as male-female and female-female at 15, however the age of consent for Male-male sex (For a partner over 18) is 17 - No corresponding male-female and Female-female (For a partner over 18) is still 15. Bermuda and Gibraltar are not countries they are UK crown territories and “unequal” ages of consent are always ‘higher”. In Suriname, the age of consent is hardly ever enforced, moreover in Chad, Ivory Coast, Niger and Madagascar has an “unsure” age of consent [or is even equal or not]? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.168.60.109 (talk) 04:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC).

This kind of information is presented on the sub pages of this article (see Age_of_consent#Ages_of_consent_in_various_countries). All of what you've posted above is already included. Except for information regartding Bahamas, Gibraltar, Suriname, Vanuatu. If you can find and cite the appropriate legislation for the Age of consent laws in those jurisdictions, please feel free to add that information. But bear in mind the quality standards of information and how it is to be presented that we require in these articles. Check the large orange box at the top of each talk page. --Monotonehell 09:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

12 to 21

The line "but laws stating ages as young as 12 and as old as 21 do exist." should be changed as it sounds like an author's opinion that 12 is too young and 21 is too old and also 12 is not the youngest but 9 is in Yemen. What about "but laws vary globally stating ages ranging from 9 to 21." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.95.158.189 (talk) 09:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC).

That age range was taken from the Ages of consent in... articles that exist on Wikipedia. We do not currently have a verified entry for Yemen. If you can provide an entry, with the appropriate legislation (or Sharia law?), and if possible a link to that law please add it to Ages of consent in Asia. But do note the requirements at the top of the page (orange box above). As far as I know, however, there is no age of consent in Yemen without marriage, nor a homosexual age of consent. But I've been unable to find any sources for this anecdotal information. --Monotonehell 10:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


OK laws on this

I heard a rumor that Oklahoma is one of the few states giving a death penalty. What if it's an 11 to a 12 year old? The AoC for OK is 16. Would both be given the death penalty? One? Neither? 72.192.94.145 16:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC) Amy

I don't think that is true. From what I know the punishment is 20 years non-parole for those over 18 committing an offence against those under 16. I have a few leads on this but I've never been happy with my understanding of the OK laws to add an entry to the appropriate page. --Monotonehell 04:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Only it isn't there! I found a page and lost it! And either way, what is it 11 to 12? 72.192.94.145 16:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC) Amy
Sorry, what isn't where? From what I understand (as I stated above) any acts performed by a person 18 or over on another person under 16 can be construed as an offence at law. --Monotonehell 10:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
A wiki article said that, and I've lost in in a world of over 5,000 entries. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.192.94.145 (talk) 16:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC).
Okay. On the map, it shows none. What happens to an 11 and a 12 year old who both willfully have sex? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.94.145 (talk) 23:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Child Protective Services, SCOH, therapy and/or family court, etc.. Actual penalties, if any, would fall on the parents/guardians. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 15:02, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Missing map?

Older version

Why was this image from around the time of this version removed?--Ty580 01:47, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

It has several inaccuracies and was complained about a few times. I'm intending to update it but it's a complex job and I've been slack, sorry. --Monotonehell 03:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Ah, thanks for updating it; I think it is a map a lot of people find interesting.--Ty580 08:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it also adds a bit of "colour" to the article. Thanks for giving me a virtual kick in the pants. ;) --Monotonehell 09:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I finally found the time to update the map. I've only coloured the areas where we have verified unambiguous information in the Ages of consent in... articles. If I've made any errors, be assured it was out of ignorance rather than malice or agenda. ;) Let me know if I have, either here or on the image's talk page and I'll correct them if the article's entry agrees. Otherwise we need to correct the article as well as the map. --Monotonehell 11:29, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
The problem is the map needs updating, good someone wants to do it, I simply dont have the techniocal resources and of course the map per se is fine, SqueakBox 16:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone know what UN Violation on the map means? Can this be put somewhere in the article? 203.214.22.93 00:54, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Where there's a discrimination between the age of consent for sexual activity based on things like homosexuality it's against the UN's declaration on human rights. It was determined from the Ages of consent in... articles. If there's any mistakes, please point them out so we can correct the articles and the map. --Monotonehell 04:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


First of all, Canada should be in black on that map...and second, it's nonsense, contrary to what should be the purpose of the map, and we need a proper map, which simply gives the various ages of consent. User:Spock 156.34.30.54 01:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
First point: Why should Canada be black? They have a equal age of consent of 14 for all.
Second point: What exactly is wrong with the map? It's based on the verified information in Wikipedia's articles.
--Monotonehell 11:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Latin America

Latin America is a cultural entity so it made no sense to arbitrarily divide it in two, ignoring Central America in the process. IO have changed the name but the map was inaccurate so i ahve removed it. Please feel free to fix and return it (ie making Central America and Mexico dark green), SqueakBox 19:11, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

As I stated on the South American -> Latin American page the map is based on the most commonly accepted 7 continents model of the World. It's simply an arbitrary segmentation of the World in order to roughly evenly distribute Jurisdictions across the subpages. Your page move works just as well, but is at odds with the other pages' naming and is open to political debate. --Monotonehell 15:09, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I dont think there is any debate about the existence of Latin America as a political entity, and for me it was certainly the only flaw in the schema (one result being Central America got squeezed out and wasnt anywhere), SqueakBox 16:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
If you look at the map that you removed - According to the 7 continent model, Central and South North America are considered one entity (red part Sorry light green part). Maybe it would be best to rename the article to Ages of consent in Central and South America and restore the continent map, instead of the vague Latin America? The problem being Latin America is a cultural not geological demarcation and is open to even more debate than the continent model. What we need is a reasonably firm demarcation over what page a certain jurisdiction belongs on, not one that is defined different ways by different people. --Monotonehell 17:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Latin America isnt vague but does also include Caribbean islands like Cuba and Mexico, which was in North America wuitht he very culturally different US and Canada. And actually the map included CA in Noprth America which geographically is mostly true m(orn true but disputed) whereas the Latin America model is actually much clearer. I'd happily change the map but I only have paint for that kind of thing and couldnt do a professional job. I dont believe there is a debate about what is Latin America but there is one about what is North America (is it Central America as well). This issue is strictly cultural, ie what counts is the country location and geography doesnt have anything to do with it, SqueakBox 18:25, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

The location of a country is defined by its border which is a geographic boundary. So that's what Geography has to do with it. Perhaps you meant Geology? In which case, it only influences some geo-political borders in so far as shorelines rivers or mountains provide natural barriers. So not much to do with our purpose.
The sole reason for a system of demarcation on this article is simply to distribute roughly the same number of jurisdictions across all the Ages of consent in... pages in a systematic and clear manner. The seven continent model was chosen purely because it roughly breaks up the World into equal chunks, it's the most commonly accepted model taught in Western Europe, Northern Europe, Central Europe, China and most English-speaking countries (according to the article), it has a ready made graphic to display on this page and isn't open to much debate.
What reasons are there for divisions along cultural lines? And how would you divide the rest of the World culturally? How does dividing things this way benefit the project? Also do you intend to finish the job you started and repair all the inconsistencies you have created? --Monotonehell 14:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
The reason is it makes no sense to split Latin America in 2. The rest of the world is already divided culturally, Asia, Africa, Europe, etc, and Latin America should not be split in 2 for any reason. The AoC is likely much more similar between S America and Mexico than between Mexico and the UIS for cultural reasons (catholic church, romance language etc), SqueakBox 14:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I could equally argue that cultural differences within Asia are probably much bigger than the differences between the US and Central America (consider Japan, India, Saudi Arabia, and the Philippines, for example), so this also deserves recognition on the map. But there's no point; it's not a map of cultural regions, just a commonly used division of the world which is convenient to use here. If you're aware of a published geographic classification that was devised to capture AoC differences, I'd be interested in using that, but it seems like original research to develop our own division here. -- Avenue 15:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
The point is not how many differences there are within the Asian category but that Latin America, with much closer similarities, was being split in two for reasons that remain unclear. It would be much better to merge the Americas into one article than to split Latin America in two. We dont base our encyclopedia on what the UN says. We are interested in the age of consent not the geography of the world and there is simply no reason to split Latin America nor precedent elsewhere within the set of articles, no other cultural region is split in two, SqueakBox 16:12, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I guess I just don't see a cultural division as being very workable here. Other cultural groups are split up by the existing framework; e.g. Austronesian people and the Anglosphere. -- Avenue 17:34, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Squeakbox, you seem to be missing the point. The 7 continent model isn't a political invention of the UN intended to divide any cultural groups. It's roughly based on geology. It's a widely accepted and taught model across the World. The reason the article is divided into separate pages on Wikipedia is purely a technical one, we can't have all that information on one page due to guidelines regarding file sizes. It throws several culturally different countries together as well as splitting others up. If we're going down the road of subjectively collecting countries together on cultural grounds, we would have a huge mess. As Avenue has pointed out, this kind of grouping borders on original research. It's best to simply draw objective circles around countries that are as non-political as we can be. Rather than open the floor to endless discussion about what page something belongs on. After all we are talking about legal jurisdictions here, which are based on geographic borders, which can contain disparate cultures within themselves. Yes, culture is part and parcel of law making, but to try to work that into a purely functional division for size is open to problems.
However, I've taken on your point that Central America was something of an orphan in the previous naming scheme. And perhaps the page for North America should be renamed to reflect the 7 continent model to something like Ages of consent in North and Central America. --Monotonehell 20:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
As an outside visitor, but having looked at many of the arguments/discussions, i have to point out that the current list, with six continents and then Latin America (including some other places), is incredibly jarring to the reader, and is obviously a compromise to make a political point or to placate a POV. I don't really expect it to change, but as editors you ought to be aware that the wikticle can be improved. Just my 2¢. Cheers, Lindsay 04:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Malaysia & Map

--Pavithran 19:39, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Great job! You added a section with a decent refernce on the right page AND updated the map. Where do I sign up to your fan club? ;) --Monotonehell 20:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

UN Rights Violation

Moved conversation to once place - Image talk:AOCWorldMap.png --Monotonehell 04:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

How does one obtain consent from those who are above the age of consent? (I don't want to go to jail for rape charges because of a night of mutually consensual sex.) Is there a contract or something? I know spousal rape is a very real threat, so marriage isn't a viable contract for consent. Anyone know the answer? (I don't want to end up a 40-year-old virgin) 67.116.254.114 01:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

This page is for discussion of improvements to the article only. None of us are lawyers and so we can not (and should not) attempt to give you legal advice. Having said that; you could try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk. Which is the place to ask questions about things other than Wikipedia. --Monotonehell 10:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. 75.23.155.170 07:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

AoC Map

I'm confused about the last edit by Monotonehell. He reverted the map image on the page from my version to the version previous, with the reason "RV: Thanks but, the colour scale is designed to show trends across areas, not to randomly differentiate the individal ages." I don't understand what "showing trends across areas" means.

The reason I made the changes was because, in the original map, I couldn't tell half of the colors apart. I don't see how making them more easily differentiable hurts the "showing trends" goal, either. —BlackTerror 15:16, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

The colour scale in the original version is a graduated scale. It has similar colours for similar ages. This means at a glance (in the future when more jurisdictions are filled in) a viewer can identify any trends across regions or see standout individual differences. It's not that important to be able to identify, for example, a particular jurisdiction that has one age from another that has an age only one year more. A graduated scale will show things like one jurisdiction with a marked difference from its neighbors. Or how attitudes in the law can be grouped in regional or culturally similar areas.
A map like this one is not a good tool for looking up particular jurisdictions, that's what the articles are for. Instead it needs to convey other information. Consider how you would present a chart of rainfall or average temperatures and what colour scale you'd use. --Monotonehell 14:13, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Problem is that it looks like there are no regional patturns. Just look at europe.Geni 14:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


Can you point out where this is stated? There shouldn't be any jurisdictionally specific statements on this page, those are reserved for the sub pages. --Monotonehell 18:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I was confusing this page with the sub page I will switch my comment to there. --76.214.152.7 19:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Canada

Is it true that the age of consent in canada is 12!? Gaia Octavia Agrippa 11:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

No, it's 14...as seen with these four links:[1][2][3][4]. If, anywhere in this article or other articles on Wikipedia, it is stated as 12, let me know so that I can correct it. Or better yet, you can correct it. Flyer22 11:47, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

wrong statement in opening section...

The statement in the opening section: "The median seems to range from 16 to 18 years..." is very far fetched, and certainly not correct. If any reference to a "median" should be mentioned it should be 14 to 16 years... Almost all developed countries, with a modern legislation on age of consent, are within this median. The EU average is 15,1 years, and there is only one EU country that has the marginal 18 years as age of consent. Adding US and Canada to the equation will not drive the factor beyond that "median" (heh... I don't even like that word, "median" !!)If we would start looking at the third world countries, we would be taken even further below the EU average... I suggest the text is corrected to 14-16...

Dinofant 02:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

... the fact that the "average" is not even contained within the "median" makes the stated "median" completely wrong. The marginal values (12-13) and (17-18) is not a "median"... the median should be the frequency surrounding the average. The current statement describes the upper margin as the median. Dinofant 03:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Limited Age of Mistake - Wikipedia has it completely wrong?

My criminal law professor told me that the statement of limited mistake on this site is unequivocally wrong. Apparently, even if a defendant can show that there was due diligence involved in ascertaining the victim's age - even getting the victim's driver's license - you can still be convicted, as the crime is one of strict liability. The view that a defense could be presented USED TO BE applicable, but apparently it is no longer the law. This section should be deleted if no citation can be provided. 19:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I heard something like that somewhere. The bigger question though is if someone under the age of consent ties up and rapes a person over the age of consent, would the person over the age of consent still be charged with statutory rape? William Ortiz 20:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Let me add to my first post that I'm not sure what the law is in other countries - my first post was in reference to the laws in the U.S. I did a little research on U.S. law and didn't find any cases concerning the issue of someone being tied up and raped by a minor, but I admit I only searched for case law in just a couple states.
Nevertheless, perhaps the section should be worded a bit differently. I'm not personally invested in this sort of thing in any way, but if Wikipedia is putting any sort of information on here that could influence decisions people make, then there should at least be some acknowledgement (especially for something regarding laws that can carry mandatory prison sentences) - besides a tiny "No citation" tag - that the section could very likely be false. 22:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The USA has lots of youth gangs full of underage people. I'd assume at least one of them gang-raped someone overage at one point. I apologize for being so blunt. William Ortiz 22:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The issue of whether a minor can be charged with rape for raping an adult is separate from what I thought you asked, which was whether an adult could conceivably be charged with statutory rape for being raped by a minor. I saw nothing in my case history research that addresses this specific question. In reality, I'm sure there wouldn't ever be such a charge put against someone, but let's say that the issue of consent was arguable in our theoretical rape case, and the minor was acquitted... could he turn around and attempt to get charges put against the adult? 23:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.239.84 (talk)
There are several problems with the scenario "someone under the age of consent ties up and rapes a person over the age of consent, would the person over the age of consent still be charged with statutory rape".
First, this scenario is absurd. (Making this absurd discussion of it meta-absurd.)
Next, this would have to occur in one of the 22 states where statutory rape is a strict liability offense. Otherwise, there is no actus reus ("guilty act") thus there can be no mens rea or ("guilty mind") to prosecute. (The mens rea in statutory rape would spring from a criminally negligent state of mind, especially where there is no reasonable claim of mistake of age, thus the Model Penal Codes strict failure of this defense when the victim is 10 or under.)
In other states, there are various problems with prosecuting someone for something done to them, rather than by them. I'm using Maryland law simply because it's the first I came up with. "Maryland Code Art. 27, § 463 Second degree rape.
(a) What constitutes.—A person is guilty of rape in the second degree if the person engages in vaginal intercourse with another person:
(1) By force or threat of force against the will and without the consent of the other person; or
(2) Who is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless, and the person performing the act knows or should reasonably know the other person is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless; or
(3) Who is under 14 years of age and the person performing the act is at least four years older than the victim."
So the minor would be guilty under (1) and/or (2). Is the adult guilty under (3)? No, they did not "engage" in intercourse, nor did they "perform the act". The adult did not do or fail to do anything. Generally, the charge of so-called "statutory rape" is used to avoid having to demonstrate lack of consent under (1), by going to the victim's age under (3). The scenario described calls for us to ignore another provision: lack of action coupled with no provision for (or evidence of) neglegent inaction.
Next, there's the issue of liability. The adult will not be liable for the minor's actions, only his own. Under comparative liability damage to your legally parked car caused by someone trying to drive through it is 100% the responsability of the other driver. If your car is illegally parked, the damages to both cars might be found to be partially or entirely your responsability. The tied-up adult is, in a sense, a parked car.
Illegality applies: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio: a detestable cause does not create a right to action. The minor's illegal act would fully overwhelm the adult's fully legal actions (actually, being tied up against his will, inaction). If you create a dangerous situation in a fully accessable area, your negelgence will land you in court. Setting up weak barriers (a fence around a pool with an unlocked gate, say), you have some defense: an adult trespassing and drowning in your pool would not (generally) bring about charges against you. (A child drowning in that pool would still probably land you in court.) The adult's "detestable action" (trespassing) was fully causative of their death. (Booby traps set up against intruders, however, are another story.) In our example, but for the minor's illegal actions (kidnapping, unlawful restraint, rape) nothing illegal occurred so no one else is liable.
In the unlikely event, though, that you are ever tied up and raped by a minor, they are found not guilty, they manage to have charges filed against you, details of their tying you up and raping you don't create reasonable doubt and jury nullification doesn't kick in, remember one thing: I am not your lawyer.
Mdbrownmsw 17:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Mdbrownmsw has covered basically all of the bases here. There is no way you could be prosecuted for statutory rape for being raped by a minor. The Australian version would be that your actions were involuntary and unintentional, so therefore you would not be liable. On the original topic of mistake as to age: that is certainly available, at least in Australia, under mistake of fact (see for example Criminal Code (Tas) s 124(2)). mjec (talk) 09:24, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
If that were true, then wouldn't a violator such as Rob Lowe be in prison? Didn't he have a mistaken age defense? Agnapostate (talk) 20:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Two underage males rape someone older than them

Two underage males rape someone older than them

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/19/national/main3522075.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3522075 http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/246370/Three_boys_8_and_9_charged_with_raping_11_year_old_girl http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2007/11/19/2007-11-19_three_young_boys_ages_8_and_9_accused_of.html

This news event might be useful for this wiki article. William Ortiz (talk) 07:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Category:Pedophilia

I agree with Flyer on this one. AoC is only peripherally related to Pedophilia. It's about as related to Geography. Not appropriate to categorize article as such (in either, for that matter). VigilancePrime (talk) 06:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Very well said. I saw that edit and it screamed "off" to me. Thanks for the quick reply on this matter. Flyer22 (talk) 08:35, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Ask around and reread (Carefully) the previous topic on this. It's not twelve. The legal age of consent is 18. "Half of Mexico retain that age of consent"... Pshh, what are your sources. In that link that's posted above it says that anyone who sleeps with someone between the ages of 12 and 18 will be penalized, not that 12 is the age of consent. Read again and fix this. Give intelligence to a monkey and he'll swear he's the center of the universe. (talk) 22:23, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Map Is Wrong

Age of consent in utah is 16 & hawaii its 14 look everywhere youll find that to be true so i dont see why we should have this map here if its not right but it does look pretty ChesterTheWorm (talk) 07:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC) ChesterTheWorm Oop's I meant the age is 16 in hawaii not 14 ChesterTheWorm (talk) 07:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC) ChesterTheWorm

Extraterritoriality

"Increasingly the age of consent laws of a state are applied not only to acts committed on its own territory, but also acts committed by its nationals or inhabitants on foreign territory[1]. This is of questionable legality under international law but such questions are often ignored or neglected, for the most part for social and/or religious reasons. Such provisions have been frequently adopted to help reduce the incidence of child sex tourism. See the relevant sections below for discussion of laws in specific jurisdictions. See also universal jurisdiction; in principle the effective age of consent is the highest of all applicable ones."

This is something new for me. I didn't think a country could make laws that applied outside of itself. That the country where it happened would prosecute the offender. If the country had no such laws against child porn, prostitution then they could not be held responsible, could they? If you were arrested by interpol say in Thailand and were an American citizen, would you be tried in Thailand- if they had these laws? Or would you be extradited back to the US to be tried? Take for example, this site http://thepiratebay.org/legal where they regularly mock legal threats sent to them citing US laws, oftenly the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. It may also have something to do with trackers, trackers don't contain the information of the media being shared itself, only coordinate the sharing of the people who do have it. But, assuming trackers are illegal in the United States, apparently they can't get Pirate Bay shut down because they are illegal in the US. The snare (talk) 05:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Seriously we have torrent sites just like pirate bay so what does that have to do with this article? And not only that piratebays own country has been bankrupting them and harrassing them so weather they go under or not it isnt relevent with this article & by the way america is the freest nation on earth ChesterTheWorm (talk) 23:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC) ChesterTheWorm

It's relevant because this article says these laws can apply to people outside their territory. And I gave you an example of where they are breaking US law but can't be extradited to the US, why isn't the same true of extraterritoriality? Get it? The snare (talk) 07:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Middle East

Why isn't there a page for the age of consent in the Middle East? 24.46.123.59 (talk) 05:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

In iceland the age of consent is 15 or so i am told, however to view porn or be a subject of porn, the minimum age is 18. - Gunnar Guðvarðarson (My Talk) 23:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

At present there two articles on the ages of consent in North America, one is called Ages of consent in Central America and the other Ages of consent in North America. This situation is very awkward as Central America is a region in North America, and all ages of consent in fooplace are by continent. I would appreciate your comments at Talk:Ages of consent in North America#Merger. gidonb (talk) 21:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Map colours are wrong

Somebody needs to change the colours of New Mexico (the AOC is 16, not 17) and of Montana (AOC is 16, not 18). see Ages of consent in North America.

Also, Iceland has the wrong colour. The AOC there is 15, not 14:

see Ages of consent in Europe :The age of consent in Iceland is 15, as specified by Section 202, which reads: "Anyone who has carnal intercourse or other sexual intimacy with a child younger than 15 years shall be subject to imprisonment for at least 1 year and up to 16 years."

202. gr. Hver sem hefur samræði eða önnur kynferðismök við barn, yngra en 15[fimmtán] ára, skal sæta fangelsi ekki skemur en 1[eitt] ár og allt að 16[sextán] árum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.10.70 (talk) 21:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Pornography Law: Appearning Young

The Pornography section reads: Films and images showing individuals under the age of 18 (or who appear to be under in some jurisdictions) in applicable jurisdictions can be classified as child pornography. No citation or example was given for that part in brackets and frankly it sounds supsicious. Maybe the citation is hidden away in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography in which case can someone add it to this article otherwise I'd say that sounds like an unverified claim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.102.148 (talk) 00:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

"Sexual consent" redirects here??

To me that's just wrong. Age is only one part of sexual consent. Other factors include permission, whether any drugs or alcohol is involved, whether all parties are awake and conscious, whether the relationship (if there is one) is at all abusive, safewords if there is any bondage or other power exchange going on, etc. I think we should consider removing that redirect and making "Sexual consent" its own page. toll_booth (talk) 02:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Their are some arguments that are not in this article then .

Their are many arguments that are not here in this article regarding those who have issues with the age of consent laws. Although I cannot source these arguments, they are logical arguments. May I add some? Or not then and? 71.105.87.54 (talk) 20:32, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Illegal?

Does this mean that sex between 2 13 or 14 year olds is illegal? SlashinatorX (talk) 02:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Huffington Post as a source

An editor adding links to Jacob Appel columns made these edits with multiple references to a January 2010 Appel blog post. Based on the sensitivity and past controversy of this and related articles, I don't think an opinion column posted on Huffington Post meets WP:RS. Appel and his views may be notable, but the article needs references other than to his opinion columns. Flowanda | Talk 01:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Strongly Disagree Regarding the reversal of the recent deletion of Appel's comment. I dislike Appel as much as the next guy, but that doesn't mean that any one editor should delete his Wikipedia presence without good reason. As long as he's being cited for the content of his columns as evidence of his views, rather than the factuality of his arguments, then he's a perfeclty legitimate source Crayvella (talk) 23:51, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
That's not the way it works. If Appel's views were being regularly quoted in news reporting in mainstream or industry media, then there'd probably be no problem adding links to a few of his columns in addition to the references to those news sources. But Appel's views have been added to a number of articles with nothing more than links to his blog posting on various websites that, although notable, are considered user generated content and not reliable sources, especially for such controversial views as Appel's. I could find no independent sources that could be used to reference Appel's views, so I removed them. Although you have readded them, the edits do not belong in the article until they can be adequately sourced. Flowanda | Talk 05:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Agreed, self-published sources like Apple's blog are not reliable sources, in the context of this article. However, I can't find the removal or re-addition of the offending text in the page history; either I'm being dense, or there's some sort of weird database issue. I'll remove the text about Apple's views. Graham87 06:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
The source is already used at age of consent reform#Commentators. I'm not sure about its use there, either, but it seems more acceptable there than in the main age of consent article. Graham87 06:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Statutory rape

"Equal to rape both in severity and sentencing"? Really? That remark needs to be backed up. Most Western jurisdictions don't seem to consider it so. 90.213.30.214 (talk) 20:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I am also concerned that although this paragraph suggests the use of this term (or principle) is common around the world, this is an American view being presented as a World view. I would like to see this remark validated with evidence.--65.196.34.5 (talk) 17:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Is it really 12? That WOULD explain all of those priests to go free after they have sworn abstinence and still rape little boys. And the pope goes free forever. But, I guess, Wikipedia would, in a way, set those priests free, because I am referring to "original research". 173.168.177.217 (talk) 00:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Delightful as your comments may be, it is 12 as that was the age of consent in Italy when the Vatican was 'formed'. Subsequently, Italy has increased to 16. If there is a relationship of dependence (student/teacher), the age of consent is 15. This topic was covered in QI Series H, episode 13.FloreatAntiquaDomus 01:04, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Redirect

Does this article REALLY need to be redirected from "Legal fucking age"!? FloreatAntiquaDomus 01:04, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Separation/Sorting by AOC continent articles

Concerning not only North America list article, but all Age of consent continent region list articles in general:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ages_of_consent_in_North_America#Puerto_Rico.3F_.2F_In_general:_Separation_by_sorting_territories_by_continent.28geograpically.29_impractical_and_mix-up.3B_more-sense_search-easier_separation_by_sorting_territories_just_by_alphabetical_frames.28A-C.2C_D-F.2C_etc..29_should_at_least_also_be_created62.143.224.212 (talk) 07:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hopefully mispellings

Resolved

MarriageMain article: Marriageable age The age at which a person can be legally married can also differ from the age of consent. In jurisdictions where the marriageable age is lower than the age of consent, those laws override the age of consent laws, at least as they apply to the spouses boner. Further still, some jurisdictions prohibit any sex outside of marriage, which can take place at any age, as in the case of Yemen.

In the second sentence are the words "spouses boner". spouses should be spouse's. God knows what 'boner' was supposed to be.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.190.203 (talk • contribs) 03:01, 2 July 2011

It was recent vandalism[5]. I've reverted it. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:15, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Map

Half of the countries on the map have the wrong color, especially in Africa. Someone needs to go carefully through Ages of consent in Africa, Ages of consent in Asia, Ages of consent in Europe, Ages of consent in North America and Ages of consent in South America and correct the map. Or better, create a new map, the colors on this map are problematic, as they are barely distinguishable (eg 13, 14 are nearly the same on the map). The map cannot stay any longer in such a state. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.174.71 (talk) 10:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Please provide a better map in such case. If you point out exactly which African country is wrong then I will fix the map. Map is essential for the article. Heard tried won (talk) 14:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Hmm. Curiously, now there is not a map. Though so essential... 85.217.45.223 (talk) 19:19, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
See the section below Talk:Age_of_consent#New_map_needed for what countries are wrong on the map (and for other problems with the map); not only that many countries are shown with the wrong color, but the map doesn't even have a legend color for 'puberty', despite the fact that several countries have 'puberty' as an age of consent. And we need the map to show South Sudan too. Yea, a map is important (though not "essential"...) for this article, but we will have one when someone makes a new one. Meanwhile the wrong map has to be kept out of the article. Wrong information doesn't belong in any article and wrong information must be removed immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.161.255 (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I didn't know that "puberty" thing at all. Makes it bit harder, not much. If I only could make these myself. Too tired & lazy to learn. 85.217.45.223 (talk) 12:50, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I have posted a request for a new map at Graphic_Lab/Map_workshop: Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Map_workshop#Map_for_Age_of_consent. Hopefully it will soon be resolved.
We have a new map now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.163.68 (talk) 22:16, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

New map needed

I've replaced the old global map, where many countries had the wrong colors, and which also had problems with the shades of blues it used (barely distinguishable)-see discussion File_talk:Age_of_Consent.png#Color_coding, with the 2 new maps which have been recently created, for North America and Europe, but new maps for Africa, Asia, Oceania and South America are still needed. In fact, what is needed is a new global map. Hope someone will create one soon.

see: Ages of consent in Asia, Ages of consent in Oceania, Ages of consent in South America, Ages of consent in Africa, for each country's age.

I have posted a request for a new map at Graphic_Lab/Map_workshop: Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Map_workshop#Map_for_Age_of_consent. Hopefully it will soon be resolved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.161.255 (talk) 13:59, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


The following countries are wrong:


Iceland: 15, not 14 Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Iceland

Lithuania: 16, not 14 Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Lithuania

US:

Bolivia: puberty (the map doesn't even have a legend color for puberty!!) Ages_of_consent_in_South_America#Bolivia

Mexico: Ages_of_consent_in_North_America#Mexico

  • Nayarit: puberty, not 12
  • Querétaro:puberty, not 12
  • Sonora:puberty, not 12
  • Tlaxcala: puberty, not 12
  • Zacatecas: 13, not 12
  • Michoacán: 12, not 18

Peru: 18, not 14 Ages_of_consent_in_South_America#Peru

Kazakhstan: 16, not 18 Ages_of_consent_in_Asia#Kazakhstan

Cambodia:15, not 16 Ages_of_consent_in_Asia#Cambodia

Senegal:16, not 13 Ages_of_consent_in_Africa#Senegal

Nigeria:18, not 13 Ages_of_consent_in_Africa#Nigeria

Chad: 14, not 13 Ages_of_consent_in_Africa#Chad

Guinea-Bissau:16, not 13 Ages_of_consent_in_Africa#Guinea-Bissau

Lesotho:16, not 14 Ages_of_consent_in_Africa#Lesotho

Mongolia: 16, not 17 Ages_of_consent_in_Asia#Mongolia

Bulgaria: 14, not 15 Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Bulgaria

Philippines: 18, not 12 (though this is more complex).Ages_of_consent_in_Asia#Philippines — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.162.241 (talk) 03:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.163.143 (talk) 22:35, 19 July 2011 (UTC) - 188.25.163.143 (talk) 23:21, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Wow!! I have discovered 3 more countries which are wrong:

Macedonia: 14, not 16 Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Macedonia

Bosnia: 14, not 16 Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Bosnia_and_Herzegovina

Tajikistan: 16, not 17 Ages_of_consent_in_asia#Tajikistan

Can't believe this. Up until now, 24 wrong countries + the 'puberty' thing which is unacceptable. This map is a joke, can't understand how it was allowed for so long here. I hope we get a new one soon!!188.25.163.143 (talk) 23:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

We have a new map now!188.25.163.68 (talk) 22:17, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I added a passage saying that it seems that the average age of consent is 16, I know it varies but I think this is worth noting, I also noted that ages as low as 12 and high as 21 exist. --99.50.131.225 (talk) 02:07, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Portugal is also wrong, it's 14, not 15, wtf, it has never been 15 in history. It went from 16 to 14 in 1995, and the exception for homosexuals was removed in 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Portugal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eggstasy (talk • contribs) 17:55, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Portugal is shown to be 14 not 15! The map is correct! Please look at the map carefully. France is 15, compare the color of Portugal to that of France.188.25.162.119 (talk) 01:36, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I thought age of consent was the age at which a person is deemed fit to give their consent: Whereas with someone of the age of majority their signature is sufficient for legal contracts, acknowledgement for risks before surgery, etc, the signature of a minor is insufficient, and a guardian's consent must be obtained. Unless this is only confounded in US law, it would be nice to include these other significances. --108.28.13.107 (talk) 11:52, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

We don't discuss other legal ages as this article is specifically about age of consent. We point to the others in the lead paragraph: "It should not be confused with the age of majority, age of criminal responsibility, the marriageable age, the voting age, the drinking age, driving age, or other purposes." - SummerPhD (talk) 14:17, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Page move

The term Age Of Consent is ambiguous since it can collide with other meanings such as driving, drinkng etc. Its also misleading because this article also covers sex between people of the same age where the phrase "consent" would not be incorrect. Therefore i propose renaming this article to "Legal age for sexual activity" or something similar. Thoughts? Pass a Method talk 20:56, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

It's not ambiguous to me. "Age of consent" typically refers to laws about sexual activity, just like "Minor (law)" typically refers to people who have not achieved legal adulthood, and the lead clears up any ambiguity a person may have upon stumbling onto this page. It deals with consensual sex between minors because they can also get in trouble (typically misdemeanors) for violating the age of consent laws. While they may be around the same age, they are not exactly the same age. 89.149.195.167 (talk) 00:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Age of consent is the normal term of art, I believe. --Herostratus (talk) 06:33, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, let's not edit war over this. The contested material is:

In some countries, the age of consent is set at onset of puberty, and in some countries such laws do not exist.

This may be true, and I don't see why this is even contentious, but first of all we need good refs.

Regarding http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm, I'm not sure that that's reliable source, but more importantly the ref doesn't support the material. There are a few countries marked with a ? meaning that the info is not available, is all.

The other ref is a book, Modern Muslim Societies. Books are generally not good references because they're not usually fact-checked, which means we are thrown back on trusting the author. Sometimes that's acceptable, sometimes not, depending on the author and the material.

It's edited by by Florian Pohl. I don't know who the author of the actual piece is (and that's a problem, but presumably solvable easily enough). Florian Pohl is a professor at Oxford College of Emory University, which is a junior college. I don't know much else about him, but that doesn't inspire nearly as much confidence as if he was a full professor at an Ivy League school or something. And the book is listed at Amazon under teen books, and described at Barnes & Noble as "children's literature". So this doesn't look to be a really scholarly work. It's a pretty dubious source for statements of fact, and since the material is contested I don't see this as being a good source.

I addtion, the particular page givem (here) doesn't support the material anyway. There's no mention there of puberty. The top of the page says "in some countries the law remains uncodified" but without knowing more (such as, which countries? for starters) that's not really enough to go on.

As to the first part, I wouldn't be completely surprised if "in some countries such laws do not exist" is true, we just need a better ref. It probably doesn't belong in the lede, though, since those countries are probably only a few exceptional ones. The puberty thing, hmmm, it would seem odd if a national legislature or ruler would actually codify this in law, but I suppose it's possible. But we would need a good ref or refs. Herostratus (talk) 04:53, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

I find it insulting that you describe an editor who was made repeated personal attacks as "reasonable". Why would i go to a talk page to speak to someone who called me a pedophile? He was not being reasonable, because articles WP:LEAD is supposed to summarize the body, which is what my edit did. The diagram in the article mentions 'puberty' and 'no law', which is why i added it. Secondly, you are wrong about my source not supporting text. My source on page 44 says quote; "In some countries the law remains uncodified, and ubject to interpetation by scholars." On page 45 it says "A significant number of Muslim countries, particularly those in the Arabaian peninsula, do not have fixed minimum age of consent. Islamic law establishes no minimum age for marriage". Btw, there was no dispute about puberty, only about the "some countires have no such law" part. I would appreciate if you self-revert, because the statements i quoted above islamic law are not controversial or disputedin sharia.
Im not sure what your criteria for reliable sources are, so why dont you help find sources yourself? This would be less time consuming and constructive Pass a Method talk 09:46, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Well, I wasn't calling the editor reasonable, I was calling his reasons for reverting as expressed in the edit summary reasonable. No, I'm not willing to go dig up the sources myself. That's your job if you want to add the material. My criteria for reliable sources is WP:RS; in a nutshell this may be expressed as "Peer-reviewed scholarly journals and newspapers/magazines know to have good fact-checking arms are assumed (not proven) to probably be reliable; everything else is up for discussion and it depends on various factors." "A significant number of Muslim countries, particularly those in the Arabian peninsula" is too vague to be useful. According to your source [6] (again, probably not a WP:RS, but a reasonable starting point), Saudi Arabia is "must be married", ditto Oman, ditto Qatar, ditto Yemen, ditto Kuwait; Bahrain is "16/married", UAE is "18/married". So it seems that in the Peninsula it's dependent on maritial status. If the minimum marriage age is (say) 14 that puts the de facto age of consent at 14, I suppose; only if there's no minimum marriage age would it be even reasonably close to true to say there's no age of consent.
Interestingly, the article Marriageable age lists Kuwait as indeed having no minimum age for marriage, not exactly. It's ref'd to here which is Emory College again, and I expect our pal Florian Pohl wrote this also. Emory College is a junior college; it's a step above a high school but it does not grant bachelor's degrees. So hmmm.
There are other refs in that article about other countries which might prove useful, but it looks like the situation is in flux and is nuanced, with possibly vague laws and various factors determining actual practice. It'd be reasonable to discuss some of this in the body of the article (with proper refs) but we want to be careful what we say in the lede. Herostratus (talk) 03:20, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Protected for 3 days

Per WP:AN3#User:PassaMethod reported by User:MikeWazowski (Result: Page protected), I have protected the page for three days; although there haven't been any reverts in the last 20 hours or so, the dispute does not appear to be resolved and the reverts are spread out over several days, leading me to believe the edit warring was not done. Use that time to flesh out whether or not the disputed sources belong in the article; if the dispute is resolved prior to the protection on this page expiring, please let me know and I'll remove it early. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:00, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

pedophilia out , homosexuality in

In the sex and the law box some politruk included pedophilia as an "offense" although it is a disease. Also since various jurisdictions are mentioned we should not forget another grave offense in many parts of the world which is understandably homosexuality (you might say buggery and sodomy imply it but let's not cut corners here comrades!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.77.223.99 (talk) 02:32, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know what a politruk is, but if it is pejorative you should probably refrain from so characterizing your fellow editors. As to the rest, you have good points and I raised them at Template talk:Sex and the law, which is where the text resides (that template is only transcluded into this article). Herostratus (talk) 04:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Map

Can someone take care of the map and do some small changes to correct the errors?

see: Ages of consent in Africa and Ages of consent in South America

also: the color for age 12 must be changed (a light yellow I think would do); and the color for age 13 must be a little lighter (a lighter shade of blue) because the map currently uses 5 shades of blue (for ages 12, 13, 14, 15, 16) which are quite difficult to distinguish from one another. 5.12.220.251 (talk) 02:13, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
China is also off. Pulled img, pending corrections.  — LlywelynII 16:36, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Someone changed Spain to 16, but I don't think the law has changed yet (it has been approved in principle, but it's not law yet; and it's not clear if it will be 15 or 16). I've removed the map. 2A02:2F0A:502F:FFFF:0:0:BC19:AD00 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:04, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Restored (although the accuracy of the map is compromised due to it being outdated, it still can be helpful to some readers; it also can easily be stated in the captions that the map may not be up to date.--GuyHimGuy (talk) 05:50, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Age_of_consent/Archive_3&oldid=1142751554"