Different views on what consent is (poll)

[Learning to undeny]

I'll give an example from someone that isn't me though. I am a close friend of an AAM. He's a trans guy who used to be in a very bad situation. This bad situation he "consented to," because the adult man he was with preyed on his insecurities, lack of will to protect himself(he has sex related PTSD as well), fear of consequences, and lack of first hand comprehension of certain life choices. He consented to things I know for a fact destroyed him, because I was the one who cleaned up this man's mess and gave the support and information needed for my friend to leave this situation. Before he met me, he was consenting to a future plan of this adult man, to take him as a tradwife and get him pregnant at the age of consent in his place of residence(16). He did not respect his male name, he did not agree with him seeking top surgery and HRT, he did not respect my friend's future plans.

In contrast to this, my friend wants to become a lawyer, and go to university, and have his own career and life. He wants to have kids one day, but having them at that age would've destroyed his dreams. Thankfully he broke away from that deadbeat POS before this all went to head.

Tell me that does not sound like hell on earth for a young and easily convinced trans boy. These kinds of people should be protected from this kind of thing. Groomers DO exist in the MAP community (shocker) and they do selfishly ruin the lives of young people who we claim to love.


Do I believe in the possibility of a teenager having the capacity and knowledge to consent? Yeah, in fact the friend I mentioned, I believe he could now after a year of being free from all this nonsense. Thankfully though it's not a risk anymore because he only dates people his age now. He is all the better for that. He's protecting himself better in relationships, he's cut off shitty bfs at the first sign of not respecting him and his transition and dreams, even just for being racist because he is a principled person.

I am happy to see how he's grown and this happiness sets my beliefs like concrete within me. I never want anyone to go through what he went through. I don't want these kids to rely on someone like me to escape nasty men because they can't argue against their tone of voice, their place of authority that they abuse, etc etc.. I'm not the person that should be relied on for this, these kids should have therapists who won't immediately snitch on them to their parents and ruin their home life and everything. If he had something like that he could've escaped it without anyone's help.

This does sound like a harmful relationship for your friend, I'm glad he escaped. And I think this type of relationship is pretty common nowadays. The adults who are more likely to disregard the legal and social norms and pursue a relationship with a minor nowadays might also be more likely to disregard the well-being and desires of their partner. Anyway, we are still in a culture with harmful stereotypes about relationships, stereotypes whose danger can be multiplied in the case of inter-generational relationships, so I'm not saying that positive relationships would not come with their own problems.

That's why I am anti-c until actual youthlib in other areas occurs.

I would not lower the age of consent until the youth get liberties in other areas, which for me includes not depending so much on their family, creating alternatives to the traditional school system, etc. So I kind of agree with that. But I wouldn't call myself anti-c as I don't find it to be a useful label. I think there are safe forms of sexual contact between people of any ages (or at least, that's possible given the right social conditions). Also, potentially positive relationships still exist nowadays, although I would advise against them given the likelihood of sociogenic harm, as well as the lack of functioning support systems for minors. So if MAPs are discriminated against for something that is not necessarily bad (both because many MAPs don't have relationships with minors and because such relationships are not always bad), I personally see the anti-c label as counter-productive (and perhaps the other contact labels too). I'd like to know your point of view.

[harpydreams]

I'll give an example from someone that isn't me though. I am a close friend of an AAM. He's a trans guy who used to be in a very bad situation. This bad situation he "consented to," because the adult man he was with preyed on his insecurities, lack of will to protect himself(he has sex related PTSD as well), fear of consequences, and lack of first hand comprehension of certain life choices. He consented to things I know for a fact destroyed him, because I was the one who cleaned up this man's mess and gave the support and information needed for my friend to leave this situation. Before he met me, he was consenting to a future plan of this adult man, to take him as a tradwife and get him pregnant at the age of consent in his place of residence(16). He did not respect his male name, he did not agree with him seeking top surgery and HRT, he did not respect my friend's future plans.

In contrast to this, my friend wants to become a lawyer, and go to university, and have his own career and life. He wants to have kids one day, but having them at that age would've destroyed his dreams. Thankfully he broke away from that deadbeat POS before this all went to head.

Tell me that does not sound like hell on earth for a young and easily convinced trans boy. These kinds of people should be protected from this kind of thing. Groomers DO exist in the MAP community (shocker) and they do selfishly ruin the lives of young people who we claim to love.


Do I believe in the possibility of a teenager having the capacity and knowledge to consent? Yeah, in fact the friend I mentioned, I believe he could now after a year of being free from all this nonsense. Thankfully though it's not a risk anymore because he only dates people his age now. He is all the better for that. He's protecting himself better in relationships, he's cut off shitty bfs at the first sign of not respecting him and his transition and dreams, even just for being racist because he is a principled person.

I am happy to see how he's grown and this happiness sets my beliefs like concrete within me. I never want anyone to go through what he went through. I don't want these kids to rely on someone like me to escape nasty men because they can't argue against their tone of voice, their place of authority that they abuse, etc etc.. I'm not the person that should be relied on for this, these kids should have therapists who won't immediately snitch on them to their parents and ruin their home life and everything. If he had something like that he could've escaped it without anyone's help.

This does sound like a harmful relationship for your friend, I'm glad he escaped. And I think this type of relationship is pretty common nowadays. The adults who are more likely to disregard the legal and social norms and pursue a relationship with a minor nowadays might also be more likely to disregard the well-being and desires of their partner. Anyway, we are still in a culture with harmful stereotypes about relationships, stereotypes whose danger can be multiplied in the case of inter-generational relationships, so I'm not saying that positive relationships would not come with their own problems.

That's why I am anti-c until actual youthlib in other areas occurs.

I would not lower the age of consent until the youth get liberties in other areas, which for me includes not depending so much on their family, creating alternatives to the traditional school system, etc. So I kind of agree with that. But I wouldn't call myself anti-c as I don't find it to be a useful label. I think there are safe forms of sexual contact between people of any ages (or at least, that's possible given the right social conditions). Also, potentially positive relationships still exist nowadays, although I would advise against them given the likelihood of sociogenic harm, as well as the lack of functioning support systems for minors. So if MAPs are discriminated against for something that is not necessarily bad (both because many MAPs don't have relationships with minors and because such relationships are not always bad), I personally see the anti-c label as counter-productive (and perhaps the other contact labels too). I'd like to know your point of view.

I agree on everything you said other than that there are safe forms of sexual contact for all ages. I don't think any prepubescent sexual contact is "safe." Can you make it out unscathed? Yeah. But it's it safe? No it's basically throwing a bunch of dice at the wall and hoping none of them land on one. It's horribly irresponsible.

In cases of truly consensual and reasonable relationships between adults and teenagers I think if they are caught, based on "victim statement," presenting a positive light of the relationship, it should be a very light sentence like community service or something like that rather than jail, and not being put on an S.O. registry.

I believe in having these rules and laws but having no lower limits on the prosecution. That way these innocent situations that are just taboo and victimless can be waved away with a slap on the wrist and the actual crimes can still be prosecuted.

You could call me comp-c as I wouldn't snitch on an innocent situation, I get why ppl might do that despite the social risk, but I think anti-c draws the line that most ppl are drawing the line for, being prepubescent kids.

[Learning to undeny]

I agree on everything you said other than that there are safe forms of sexual contact for all ages. I don't think any prepubescent sexual contact is "safe." Can you make it out unscathed? Yeah. But it's it safe? No it's basically throwing a bunch of dice at the wall and hoping none of them land on one. It's horribly irresponsible.

In cases of truly consensual and reasonable relationships between adults and teenagers I think if they are caught, based on "victim statement," presenting a positive light of the relationship, it should be a very light sentence like community service or something like that rather than jail, and not being put on an S.O. registry.

I believe in having these rules and laws but having no lower limits on the prosecution. That way these innocent situations that are just taboo and victimless can be waved away with a slap on the wrist and the actual crimes can still be prosecuted.


You could call me comp-c as I wouldn't snitch on an innocent situation, I get why ppl might do that despite the social risk, but I think anti-c draws the line that most ppl are drawing the line for, being prepubescent kids.

OK, that could be a cool solution.