this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2023
3 points (58.8% liked)

Asklemmy

43893 readers
1207 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!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. 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.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

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

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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
[–] Amicchan@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I got curious about what the Bolsheviks would have done so I searched.

Interestingly enough, the Bolsheviks seemed to have went for no fixed or constant age of consent; instead, they used the presence of puberty as a primary factor for the age of consent. Courts would use medical testing to determine if a person was going through puberty.

In the 1922 RSFSR Criminal code of article 166 and 167:^[https://docs.cntd.ru/document/901757375 (russian, use translator)]

4. Преступления в области половых отношений

  1. Половое сношение с лицами, не достигшими половой зрелости, карается - лишением свободы на срок не ниже трех лет со строгой изоляцией.

  2. Половое сношение с лицами, не достигшими половой зрелости, сопряженное с растлением, или удовлетворение половой страсти в извращенных формах, карается

4. Sexual offences

  1. Sexual intercourse with persons who have not reached puberty is punishable - by deprivation of liberty for a term not less than three years with strict isolation.

  2. Sexual intercourse with persons who have not reached puberty зрелос, involving corruption, or the satisfaction of sexual passion in perverted forms, is punishable - by deprivation of liberty for a term not less than five years.

Same for the 1926 RSFSR Criminal code:^[https://docs.cntd.ru/document/901757374 (russian, use translator)]

  1. Sexual intercourse with persons who have not reached puberty, involving corruption or satisfaction of sexual passion in perverted forms, - imprisonment for a term of up to eight years.

Sexual intercourse with persons who have not reached puberty, committed without the specified aggravating signs, - imprisonment for a term of up to three years.

  1. Debauchery of minors or minors committed by means of debauched acts against them, - imprisonment for a term of up to five years.

  2. Sexual intercourse involving physical violence, threats, intimidation or using the victim's helpless state by deception (rape) - […]

  3. Entering into marriage with a person who has not reached the age of marriage, - imprisonment for a term of up to two years. Entering into a marriage with a person who has not reached puberty , or forcing him to enter into such a marriage - the measures provided for in Article 151 of this Code .

So, for example,

  • If there was a 16 year old teenager and they had not gone through puberty, they would technically be considered a minor and thus lack age of consent.
  • If a 15 year old teenager had initiated puberty and there was no coercion, they would have consent.

What I wonder is what would happen to people older than 18 who never got puberty, like some people with Kallmann Syndrome. Would they still be considered minors then?


Of course this is for the RSFSR; I don't know what the other soviet republics did.

Surviving socialist states

The current surviving socialist states seem to have stuck to the more common fixed age of consent concept:

Age in years:

  • China - 14
  • Laos - 15
  • DPRK - 15 (from 0 years, I think)
  • Cuba - 16
  • Vietnam - 18
[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Interesting. Clear attempt to use dialectical materialism in lawmaking.

About the Kallman syndrome, such person wouldn't be considered minor since that was separate cathegory, but the law does not specify age in numbers, but clearly mention puberty so it would depend on medical opinion most likely.