That's the fucked up part. You're assuming the one w/ the cock is the one behaving inappropriately. Sorry, it takes to two tango. Women want to bitch and moan about equality... that's part of it. If a 13 year old girl is too stupid to know she shouldn't fuck, isn't a boy?
but I don't think it is "fucked up" to protect children from either prying adults or other children who display inappropriate behaviour.
I'm referring only to statutory rape. Consensual sexual conduct between two people regardless of age.
I am sure you'd agree with that?
Nah, it's not me, and it's not you. Well, not really. Your comment about the expensive house in the city seemed extremely... well.. stupid and short-sighted. How do you know anything about those people's lives? Sounds like you're shitting on everyone that doesn't go move out into the suburbs at 32 to reproduce.
You seem a rather angry individual whenever we have any "discussions". You have an accusatory tone I find rather amusing!
It's like: "You f**king Brit, you live in a sh@th@le with s#it laws, plus the whole place f%cking stinks! So, £*ck you!"
But seriously -- did I personally attack anyone? Did I say fuck you, or fuck off? No. I call things as I see them. If I see a big pile of bullshit, I yell it, regardless of whose pile of shit it is. Don't get me going on sodomy laws in the the Red States, or the complete train wreck that is the US immigration system, war on drugs, or the Japanese joke of a corporate world.
I guess it's similar in America, but much less retardedly defined. Both minors -- no crime. There is no gray area though. If one is over the age of consent (regardless of sex) they are the guilty one. I don't know how often it's abused, but I guess if someone' father finds out, you can get in a world of trouble. So you get an 18 year old black kid who gets a consensual blow job from a 17 year old (I think it was his girlfriend even) and what happens? Well, everyone in America hates black people so the poor kid gets 10 years in a state pen. Yes, this is a true story, although quite a few people are up in arms over it. Definitely going to make my son date only older women in high school.
This is an article relating to it, however I think you have to appreciate that although the law is defined as a standard, it tends to be applied differently in different cases. It is not an absolute. I was merely pointing out that such cases can & do occur!
But there are a plethora of wrong times. Had I chosen to start my family by what appears to be the standards of this thread (that is, according to my wife's biological clock) then we would've brought a child into the world when I had my first real job in my profession and worked about 60 hours on an average week, lived in a 1 room (not bedroom...room) flat, still went out until noon every single Saturday, and had absolutely zero money in my savings account. How is waiting until I advance a bit at work and get a bit of my wild hairs out in any way a bad decision?
There is no right time,
Well, I live in a nation of people that would sternly disagree. Disagree to the point that they don't care that they won't collect any social security if they don't start reproducing. I don't think money is the most important thing, but if you have 3 kids and you work at McDonald's, you should think twice (three, four times even) before having another. Being a parent means being responsible. Part of that responsibility is providing. If you can't provide, pull and pray, wear a condom, or something. So even if you are never truly ready, there are infinite levels of unreadiness.
and financial requirements are one of the lowest order priorities in the parental equasion.
Your/their definition is faulty though. It is physically possible for a women to rape a man (with penetration).
Hence, the boy would have raped the girl, subject to evidence.
