16/12: Pro-Reform's position on AMSC

[WavesInEternity]

I've worked with kids of pretty much all ages. I am aware of the reality, but we can't change the world overnight.

On the whole, we appear to be in agreement in all key respects: if we are to change society, we ought to start somewhere, and this initial change must take into account the limited range of possibilities that are realistic to envision in practice.

We can move towards more fundamental change afterwards once we've obtained evidence for widespread consensual AMSC that is demonstrably harmless and positive.

What do you think of my idea, briefly mentioned elsewhere, that we should prioritize reaching the point where the law in at least one jurisdiction would allow for the existence of a specialized dating website for MAAs & AAMs (12+ or 13+) with the participation of authorities and academics, preferably non-profit and perhaps with dedicated social workers? In any case, we first and foremost ought to prove that consensual AMSC works.

My AoA is 8-14, so the proposal would be far from perfect from a purely selfish position, if implemented.

My apologies. The unfortunate fact, then, is that most paedophile GLs would effectively be sidelined by this proposal, but hopefully it would serve to facilitate further change in the future.

[BLueRibbon]

What do you think of my idea, briefly mentioned elsewhere, that we should prioritize reaching the point where the law in at least one jurisdiction would allow for the existence of a specialized dating website for MAAs & AAMs (12+ or 13+) with the participation of authorities and academics, preferably non-profit and perhaps with dedicated social workers? In any case, we first and foremost ought to prove that consensual AMSC works.

As of several years ago, the Hungarian version of Grindr allowed 14 year olds to join, consistent with the Hungarian AoC. However, according to the person who relayed this information, the teen boys would all write on their profiles that they didn't want old men to bother them.

Any proposal to create a matchmaking service specifically for MAPs and AAMs would be immediately shot down, in my opinion.

[WavesInEternity]

Any proposal to create a matchmaking service specifically for MAPs and AAMs would be immediately shot down, in my opinion.

Oh, in the current context, I'm sure. I'm not referring to an overt proposal to do so. I'm speaking as a matter of legal strategy, the argument being that genuine (preferential or exclusive) MAAs and AAMs are small enough numbers that such a platform is more or less necessary if harmless, consensual AMSC is to actually occur on a significant enough scale, especially without children being bothered by old men (speaking as an old-ish man), for a more fundamental change in social attitudes to occur.

Any legal change that doesn't involve the possibility for various practical means for MAAs and AAMs to find each other would be, in my view, ultimately pointless. Something we must keep in mind is that in any system, actual abuse will inevitably occur, which means that the number and visibility of positive instances must drown out the egregious negative ones.

The youths' rights perspective could include the first step of allowing matchmaking services for youths among themselves. I definitely would have liked to try out one as a young teenager (one of my greatest regrets in life is to have missed out on romance/sex with girls in my AoA when I was that age myself). Romantically/sexually active minors are currently effectively restricted to a very small pool of potential partners, which sets them up for failure. I've lost count of the young women who told me that their early romances with schoolmates were unfulfilling and awkward. My two girlfriends both said they'd have preferred to date me as an adult back while they were in my ideal AoA.

[Fragment]

Pro-Reform isn't necessarily about what is morally justifiable. It's about law, and therefore legal considerations need to be taken into account.

You mention differentiating penetrative and non-penetrative sex. That already does happen, at least on the level of sentencing, and in many jurisdictions the crime of indictment. I was sentenced for a crime that has a minimum 6 month sentence, but if penetration had been involved it would've been a minimum 5 year sentence (I'm very lucky that I considered a blow job might be "too much" for an initial sexual encounter).

Another legal consideration is "how easy will this be to prosecute?", "is it ambiguous?", "will there be extra false positives?", "or false negatives?" In general we (well, society) don't want more bad guys to go free, not when it comes to hurting kids.

A final thing I think is key to pro-reform is "can this system actually reduce the amount of abuse in society?" We have extremely harsh penalties in place for AMSC, yet sexual abuse is still pretty common. My belief is that better sexual education, better recognition and acceptance of (at least) teen-adult relationships and more discussion of how to say "yes" (not just "no") would actually lead to healthier sexual relationships in general with an ability to see abusers called out for it, instead of protected by the veil of shame that benefits them now.

Just a few brief thoughts as I try to get back into the swing of posting.

[WavesInEternity]

Pro-Reform isn't necessarily about what is morally justifiable. It's about law, and therefore legal considerations need to be taken into account.

Indeed. It is relatively easy to come up with utopias based on certain moral principles and applying them without regard for the practical complexities of society as it is. It is much harder to formulate pragmatic proposals that might 1) be acceptable for the majority of the population in at least one liberal democracy; 2) be fully applicable in practice without becoming distorted or having unintended consequences.

You mention differentiating penetrative and non-penetrative sex. That already does happen, at least on the level of sentencing, and in many jurisdictions the crime of indictment. I was sentenced for a crime that has a minimum 6 month sentence, but if penetration had been involved it would've been a minimum 5 year sentence (I'm very lucky that I considered a blow job might be "too much" for an initial sexual encounter).

Damn... a 5 year minimum sentence for fellatio. Is cunnilingus in the same legal category?

I wouldn't include oral sex among "penetrative" practices. In fact, if we were to truly base our laws on objective risk of harm, it's really only vaginal penetration that's particularly problematic because the vagina is configured differently before puberty (the walls are initially smooth, but folds start to form during puberty to accommodate penetration). Sodomy when properly practiced is generally physically harmless, even for quite young children, but that's something the world is most definitely not ready to hear...

Another legal consideration is "how easy will this be to prosecute?", "is it ambiguous?", "will there be extra false positives?", "or false negatives?" In general we (well, society) don't want more bad guys to go free, not when it comes to hurting kids.

One notion I'm currently exploring is that the age of consent could be lowered to 12 with the caveat that if a minor between the ages of 12 and 16 is to have legal sexual contact with an adult, it's always the minor that must make the first move and initiate sexual activity clearly and unambiguously, ideally with recorded proof. Adults would be allowed to openly disclose that they are MAPs, but they wouldn't be allowed to ask children for sex. All AMSC within the child's family would remain illicit.

The true practical goal of such a system would be to enable the creation of legal platforms for MAAs and AAMs to find each other, such as dating websites.

A final thing I think is key to pro-reform is "can this system actually reduce the amount of abuse in society?" We have extremely harsh penalties in place for AMSC, yet sexual abuse is still pretty common. My belief is that better sexual education, better recognition and acceptance of (at least) teen-adult relationships and more discussion of how to say "yes" (not just "no") would actually lead to healthier sexual relationships in general with an ability to see abusers called out for it, instead of protected by the veil of shame that benefits them now.

I am in complete agreement with this. In fact, I strongly believe that a society without any age of consent laws whatsoever, only the laws prohibiting rape and assault, but with better sexual education from an early age, would have significantly lower rates of sexual abuse (not just that of children, either) than our current society.