super_user_do

Yeah it’s also for that but it’s not the main purpose. If it was like that, they could have just placed an age limit, while the concept itself of “age of consent” starts from the assumption that even a minor at some point reaches the minimum level of emotional and cerebral maturity in order to give full consent. Moreover, the age of consent also has other clauses in most countries. For example, in Italy the technical age of consent is 14 (which also brings other things such as individual penal responsibility if the kid does something illegal, the freedom to be heard in court as a witness etc) but when there’s specific power dynamics involved the age of consent rises to 16

Oh, that’s right, what you did is a straw man argument not an ad hominem one. I also never stated that he’s right just because he’s famous, don’t put in the mouth of others things they’ve never said

You got the point blud

I think you’re missing the point. Stallman meant that it would be absurd to classify something as rape just for their age, the most important thing is of course context. Moreover, all of this argument about someone needing to reach the complete state of neurological development in order to have sex is flawed since men don’t develop to their full extent until their 30s. You can absolutely make a choice for yourself even before that age and therefore before reaching that point of brain development. If it wasn’t like that, we also wouldn’t allow people to vote, get guns, work etc. The age of consent exists in order not to criminalize sex between teenagers and also allow to shades and case to case evaluation. Of course it is not perfect, but it is the best tool we have

Nice ad hominem fallacy bro

Edit: sorry it’s straw man

It’s time to teach them we can actually build a free, open source and popular alternative to their dystopian monopoly!