Where is the limit set (if it is set at all)?
Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2025 10:06 pm
I’ve only been on the forum for a short time, but I’ve formed some ideas about the environment and I think I share a lot of the frustration regarding this phobia—whether genuine or performative—that surrounds these issues.
However, I haven’t seen a post that explicitly talks about limits; the discussion is about sexual liberalization and flexibility from this perspective, but that’s not the only right an adult has with respect to a minor.
One could talk about the issue of soft drugs, the transgender issue, and alcohol. (I find the latter the most extreme of the three, as it causes permanent harm and there is no context—except to liven up social interactions—in which its use is “justified.”) Or, furthermore, should a minor have the right to assisted suicide?
Of course, these discussions are only relevant if you believe these things should be legal for adults; if you think they should always be illegal, then there is no disparity in treatment.
So I want to ask: Do you draw a line? And if you do, where exactly?
Most of the comments I read are about lightening the weight given to sex, and I agree with that, but somehow it seems to me that this is a way of removing it from the discussion of youth rights. The young person isn’t being given an additional right; sex is being removed as an issue.
I should warn you that my English is terrible, as I’m using a translator, so some points might sound odd. I also hope I posted in the right section; I was tempted to put it in off-topic.
As for my position, I would like to consider adolescents as adults, capable of judgment and self-determination. The state should, by virtue of their youth, accustom them to the exercise of their rights and provide safeguards while they learn to manage those rights, so that by the time they reach working age they are fully autonomous. A sort of adaptation period, in other words.
And I believe this should be done in the most “natural” way possible; not through predetermined ages but through individual action. That’s why I like to think of entering the workforce as the line of demarcation, since from that moment on one can potentially be considered independent from one’s family and social context.
My position might be a bit extreme, but I like to try to approach these issues in a consistent way: If it applies to one thing, it should apply to everything. Or at least follow a coherent line of thought without obvious exceptions.
However, I haven’t seen a post that explicitly talks about limits; the discussion is about sexual liberalization and flexibility from this perspective, but that’s not the only right an adult has with respect to a minor.
One could talk about the issue of soft drugs, the transgender issue, and alcohol. (I find the latter the most extreme of the three, as it causes permanent harm and there is no context—except to liven up social interactions—in which its use is “justified.”) Or, furthermore, should a minor have the right to assisted suicide?
Of course, these discussions are only relevant if you believe these things should be legal for adults; if you think they should always be illegal, then there is no disparity in treatment.
So I want to ask: Do you draw a line? And if you do, where exactly?
Most of the comments I read are about lightening the weight given to sex, and I agree with that, but somehow it seems to me that this is a way of removing it from the discussion of youth rights. The young person isn’t being given an additional right; sex is being removed as an issue.
I should warn you that my English is terrible, as I’m using a translator, so some points might sound odd. I also hope I posted in the right section; I was tempted to put it in off-topic.
As for my position, I would like to consider adolescents as adults, capable of judgment and self-determination. The state should, by virtue of their youth, accustom them to the exercise of their rights and provide safeguards while they learn to manage those rights, so that by the time they reach working age they are fully autonomous. A sort of adaptation period, in other words.
And I believe this should be done in the most “natural” way possible; not through predetermined ages but through individual action. That’s why I like to think of entering the workforce as the line of demarcation, since from that moment on one can potentially be considered independent from one’s family and social context.
My position might be a bit extreme, but I like to try to approach these issues in a consistent way: If it applies to one thing, it should apply to everything. Or at least follow a coherent line of thought without obvious exceptions.