Asklemmy

43893 readers

1264 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

What is the marxist conception of the age-of-(sexual)-consent discussion? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 2 years ago by Amicchan@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I have noticed that when I looked at some discussions on age-of-consent that the arguments are often built on metaphysics. (For example, the idea that sexual development (or puberty) has definite, exact stages; and start or end dates.)

However, the dialectical materialist conception opposes metaphysics; so this would mean that if the age-of-consent is built on metaphysics; then it will not correspond to material reality.

This would include the start and end of sexual development in people; some people self-initate or end puberty much earlier (like at 8 or 9 years age) than what is traditionally expected (12 to 13 years age); and the rate of puberty onset has changed with the material conditions^[J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006 Nov; 60(11): 910–911. doi: 10.1136/jech.2006.049379 PMCID: PMC2465479 PMID: 17053275] (as dialectical materialism predicts).

So, if a person ends puberty (sexual development) much earlier than the age-of-consent and has gotten clear sex education; then should they still be not allowed to have sex until that age? What about adults having late puberty? What about people who never went through puberty, like some people with Kallmann Syndrome?

Since the conclusion of sexual development allows a person to have sex without sustaining damage, with good and proper sex education (as is education that doesn't lead to rape), that would mean the person would be able to safely have sex, even if they have late puberty or end puberty earlier than expected. This is the opinion I've developed from my rethinking on this topic.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

First, based on your post history i assume you're discussing in a good faith.

But you're probably gonna get banhammered anyway. Thanks to horde of libertarians in the internet every discussion about those things is automatically considered bad faith pedo bait everywhere except liberast pits.

That's why internet marxist stance is "do not talk about it". From what i see in the real life marxist theoreticians also basically just accepted current societal norm without any comments.

Edit: i seen Nutomic posts so i guess no ban.

[–] Amicchan@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

But you’re probably gonna get banhammered anyway. Thanks to horde of libertarians in the internet every discussion about those things is automatically considered bad faith pedo bait everywhere except liberast pits.

Yep. They suck. 😒

That’s why internet marxist stance is “do not talk about it”. From what i see in the real life marxist theoreticians also basically just accepted current societal norm without any comments.

OK, thanks.