4) The myth of the "brain development stops at 25" has caused people to see anyone below the age of 25 as being too mentally impaired for anything, not least for sex.
Is this thing about the Brain being fully developed until 25 actually true or is it a load of nonsense. There are people saying it is factual but is it really and is it really accurate?
Grunko wrote: Sun Mar 09, 2025 10:04 pm
Is this thing about the Brain being fully developed until 25 actually true or is it a load of nonsense. Is that even accurate and are there any evidence that proves it is nonsense
I did some reading. Apparently it's false, but not in a way that's helpful to us. The prefrontal cortex can be fully developed in your 20s before 25, and it can continue to develop after you're 25. When neurological researchers say your prefrontal cortex doesn't plateau until you're in your 20s, apparently there's nothing specific about the age of 25, it seems to be arbitrary.
The idea of basing the age of consent on how developed the prefrontal cortex is, isn't as intuitive as it first appears if you start to apply it consistently. If you base your criteria of consent on when the brain is fully developed, since adults with ADHD have impaired executive functions, they wouldn't be able to consent to sex either. Under those conditions you have a dilemma: either children can't consent and neither can adults with ADHD, or adults with ADHD can consent and so can children. And this isn't even delve into whether "fully developed" is the same for everyone.
Grunko wrote: Sun Mar 09, 2025 10:04 pm
Is this thing about the Brain being fully developed until 25 actually true or is it a load of nonsense. Is that even accurate and are there any evidence that proves it is nonsense
I did some reading. Apparently it's false, but not in a way that's helpful to us. The prefrontal cortex can be fully developed in your 20s before 25, and it can continue to develop after you're 25. When neurological researchers say your prefrontal cortex doesn't plateau until you're in your 20s, apparently there's nothing specific about the age of 25, it seems to be arbitrary.
The idea of basing the age of consent on how developed the prefrontal cortex is, isn't as intuitive as it first appears if you start to apply it consistently. If you base your criteria of consent on when the brain is fully developed, since adults with ADHD have impaired executive functions, they wouldn't be able to consent to sex either. Under those conditions you have a dilemma: either children can't consent and neither can adults with ADHD, or adults with ADHD can consent and so can children. And this isn't even delve into whether "fully developed" is the same for everyone.
I found some more links
https://www.thestudiesshowpod.com/p/epi ... -old-brain
I had a look at this. There is another podcast video which talks about the research. They mention things like individual differences…. No such thing as fully developed as Brian’s change throughout life (making connections and losing connections), and also explain no two Brains grow and develops at the same time or pace. They also talk that some people may never have a fully developed Brian.
If there are saying the frontal lobes (which is responsible for decision making, planning, emotional regulation, thinking, behaviour, read situations and other people, concentration, etc.) are not fully developed by 25 or 30, I find that science around the Brain development could be a bit biased and a bit harmful both to teenagers and adults because what if your over that age and struggle to do these things or find there are some teenagers who able to do these things better than even some people who are say 25+ or even at 40 with no fault of the own. I know you mentioned about ADHD, but what about other disabilities or mental health condition. it puts pressure on those over a certain age.
Grunko wrote: Sat Mar 15, 2025 1:31 amhttps://www.thestudiesshowpod.com/p/epi ... -old-brain
I had a look at this. There is another podcast video which talks about the research. They mention things like individual differences…. No such thing as fully developed as Brian’s change throughout life (making connections and losing connections), and also explain no two Brains grow and develops at the same time or pace. They also talk that some people may never have a fully developed Brian.
True, but I think the point is about when the brain plateaus. However, even then it's a problem because plateauing for one person isn't necessarily going to be the same for different people, so the criteria is still ultimately arbitrary.
https://www.sciencefocus.com/comment/br ... evelopment
If there are saying the frontal lobes (which is responsible for decision making, planning, emotional regulation, thinking, behaviour, read situations and other people, concentration, etc.) are not fully developed by 25 or 30, I find that science around the Brain development could be a bit biased and a bit harmful both to teenagers and adults because what if your over that age and struggle to do these things or find there are some teenagers who able to do these things better than even some people who are say 25+ or even at 40 with no fault of the own. I know you mentioned about ADHD, but what about other disabilities or mental health condition. it puts pressure on those over a certain age.
Yeah, this is the major rationale I've heard people use. That the frontal lobe is underdeveloped for minors. I think you're right about the pressure. Let's say an adult have the same executive functions and IQ as most minors do; do we say they have to act like they are like they are the same as other adults? On the other side, say you have a minor with the executive functions and IQ of most adults, should they have the same responsibility as adults?
If the differences between adults and minors are to be taken as seriously as they are, then they should be objective. Otherwise you need to leave room for exceptions (like how it used to be before the current hysteria, that even takes issue with one year age gaps).
Age of Consent (AoC) laws and Victorian-era moral frameworks reveal a profound disconnection from the intricate fabric of human interaction. These institutional constructs, while intended as protective measures, impose rigid categorizations that fail to account for individual uniqueness and contextual nuance. Consider the instance of a 14-year-old possessing extraordinary intellectual capabilities—a scenario that defies the simplistic age-based assumptions embedded in AoC laws. Such a case highlights the absurdity of uniform standards designed without consideration for human diversity. Similarly, Romeo and Juliet laws exemplify how legal frameworks often replicate societal oversimplifications, perpetuating stereotypes rather than promoting nuanced understanding. The Victorian legacy underscores how societal norms shape perceptions of consent and grooming, reducing these concepts to dichotomous binaries. This reductionism ignores the fluidity of power dynamics, where a nurturing interaction can transform from dominantly controlled to mutually beneficial. The rigidity of these frameworks leads to policies that fail to address the multifaceted nature of human relationships. Thus, it becomes evident that both AoC laws and Victorian morals foster an environment of oversimplification, leading to inconsistent judgments and policies that often hinder rather than support individual flourishing. A more sophisticated approach is necessary—one that acknowledges the intricate dance of power, consent, and context, necessitating a case-by-case evaluation that respects the uniqueness of each interaction.
LLMs safeguard my speech and my privacy against analysis. Read: https://forum.map-union.org/viewtopic.php?t=1797
My basic question in this AMSC criminality context; why they treat "adult child intimate bodily contact" that can bring enormous joy to both as "imbalance of power" only in sexual matters but not in other matters which also involves adult child intimate body contacts especially in many other child affectionate loving matters which entails affectionate body touch. At the end, if I may allowed to ask an extremely sensitive question; what about the mothers breast feeing their children.
Grunko wrote: Sat Mar 15, 2025 1:31 amhttps://www.thestudiesshowpod.com/p/epi ... -old-brain
I had a look at this. There is another podcast video which talks about the research. They mention things like individual differences…. No such thing as fully developed as Brian’s change throughout life (making connections and losing connections), and also explain no two Brains grow and develops at the same time or pace. They also talk that some people may never have a fully developed Brian.
True, but I think the point is about when the brain plateaus. However, even then it's a problem because plateauing for one person isn't necessarily going to be the same for different people, so the criteria is still ultimately arbitrary.
https://www.sciencefocus.com/comment/br ... evelopment
If there are saying the frontal lobes (which is responsible for decision making, planning, emotional regulation, thinking, behaviour, read situations and other people, concentration, etc.) are not fully developed by 25 or 30, I find that science around the Brain development could be a bit biased and a bit harmful both to teenagers and adults because what if your over that age and struggle to do these things or find there are some teenagers who able to do these things better than even some people who are say 25+ or even at 40 with no fault of the own. I know you mentioned about ADHD, but what about other disabilities or mental health condition. it puts pressure on those over a certain age.
Yeah, this is the major rationale I've heard people use. That the frontal lobe is underdeveloped for minors. I think you're right about the pressure. Let's say an adult have the same executive functions and IQ as most minors do; do we say they have to act like they are like they are the same as other adults? On the other side, say you have a minor with the executive functions and IQ of most adults, should they have the same responsibility as adults?
If the differences between adults and minors are to be taken as seriously as they are, then they should be objective. Otherwise you need to leave room for exceptions (like how it used to be before the current hysteria, that even takes issue with one year age gaps).
I personally see Age as a metric for determing consent to be deeply flawed. People mature at different rates, people have very different emotional needs, intellectual levels, wants and needs and fears. Trying to package something as complex as the question of whether sex is right for an individual into an age is meaningless. Someone could be in their 30's and have no interest in sex, be emotionally or intellectually in a place where sex would be highly inappropriate. Meanwhile, a person could be 11 years old and be emotionally and intellectually in a much better place for a sexual relationship and have a genuine want and need for a sexual relationship.
You might as well have an Age for Enjoying Star Wars or an Age for doing the dishes or an Age for Laughing at rude jokes.
If you had no age of consent but you had a straight forward expectation that to engage in a sexual act, a person must meet a set of expectations.
- They should have a level of understanding about the sexual act, what it is and the positives and negatives of it.
- It should be safe for them to do.
- They should want to do it and consent to it. Not just consent to it but should want to do it.
That's it, that seems pretty standard for any human regardless of age.
The "safe to do" would mean someone young can't just have penetrative sex because they're physically not developed enough to do it safely. An adult with a development problem or underlying health conditions that would make sex risky would also not have sex. Human rights issue? Maybe, but if that's our priority then why can be in good conscience deny a human right to a young person?
If someone can't articulate what they're doing then they shouldn't do it. A person with a mental disability shouldn't be having sex if they don't understand what that means, and a young person shouldn't. But if they can talk about it and understand it then that should unblock that issue.
And they should want it and consent to it. The issue of whether a child can consent goes away because the other two points cover that.
Keep every stone they throw at you. You've got castles to build.
The power of the people is stronger than the people in power.
To endaavor to domineer over conscience, is to invade the citadel of heaven.
Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor
Outis wrote: Sun Jun 22, 2025 10:45 am
If someone can't articulate what they're doing then they shouldn't do it. A person with a mental disability shouldn't be having sex if they don't understand what that means, and a young person shouldn't. But if they can talk about it and understand it then that should unblock that issue.
And they should want it and consent to it. The issue of whether a child can consent goes away because the other two points cover that.
I might go a step further and say even mentally disabled people should have the right to sexual pleasure. Like the issue isn't even consent, it's our outlook to sex itself. A mentally disabled person probably shouldn't be driving, but we would say access to public transport is something they should have. The potential harm, in this context, comes from the "how" not the "what."
being fully developed until 25 actually true or is it a load of nonsense. There are people saying it is factual but is it really and is it really accurate?
being fully developed until 25 actually true or is it a load of nonsense. Is that even accurate and are there any evidence that proves it is nonsense
