I use the terms wife and girlfriend interchageably. This is a habit I've picked up from the Chinese.I had a drink with a old friend tonight who has worked in China for years, so I asked him about this. He said it's bollocks. Chinese people make exactly the same distinction between wives and girlfriends that we do.
Oh you know one guy who worked in China? That's not confirmation bias
at all. His expert opinion far outweighs my own. After all, I've only lived here most of my adult life, speak the language fluently, and have a Chinese wife. That can't compare to your drinking buddy who used to live here.
The Chinese use the words laogong (husband) and laopo (wife) to describe their lover if they are in a committed relationship. They typically begin using them once the relationship is consummated. They refer to each other as husband and wife during their courtship and engagement, long before they are married. These are the same exact words they will continue to use after they are formally married.
Tell that to your idiot friend who knows nothing about China.
This seems to be rather similar to you saying that you had two adopted children, but on further enquiry it turns out that formally, you don't.
Ding ding ding ding ding! So, are you saying I don't, or formally
I don't? Does that mean I lied, or does that perhaps mean that I raise my wife's children as my own but haven't gone through the legal formalities yet? That is the correct use of the word adopted
, it does not require a formal or legal action.
Are you formally married, Joe? Or do you just refer to your girlfriend as your wife sometimes?
We have a marriage license but we haven't had the money to have the big wedding she wants yet.
6 to 12 isn't my number; they're the numbers used in the US to define criminal responsibility. And you said that you would like the AoC to be reduced to those levels. Here in Britain, it's 10. That's too young for the AoC, Joe.
I never suggested lowering the age of consent to 6 or even 10. I'd appreciate it if you stopped characterizing my argument as such. You know it's dishonest. Is that the reputation you want to cultivate? My point was that I don't think it's fair that we consider young children adults in some situations, but children in other situations. Did you not get that or are you simply pretending you didn't get that? Set the bar a little higher for yourself, Gnu.
If you've been following along you'll find that what I've actually said several times is that we shouldn't charge children as adults at all. My position is that we should set the age of adult responsibility to 14, which would apply to both age of consent and liability for criminal prosecution as an adult. I've also said that 16 is also a reasonable age of adult responsibility, if the punishment for consensual sex with a minor from 14 to 16 was a slap on the wrist.
Because you're saying that a 31-year-old man having sex with an 11-year old girl should be legal in some circumstances:
Certain theoretical circumstances that I quickly admitted may be an impossible condition to meet.
if and only if, you could determine with 100% certainty that it was completely consensual, and that she understood what she was doing and both the short and long term ramifications of her actions, I think it should be legal.Why do you bother promoting that view when you concede that there is no way of establishing 100% certainty, and that the vast majority of 11-year-old girls would not understand the potential consequences of their actions?
I wasn't promoting that view. I was answering a question. You're cherry picking out of context here, and you know that of course, but allow me to shine a light on it.
Do you think that it should be legal for you to have sex with an 11 year old?
You'll forgive me for not giving you a simple yes or no, as that's a difficult question. I don't think all 11 year olds are created equally. I certainly don't think most of them are anything like her.
If you really want to force an answer out of me, I would say that if and only if, you could determine with 100% certainty that it was completely consensual, and that she understood what she was doing and both the short and long term ramifications of her actions, I think it should be legal. If there is no coercion, manipulation, threat, deception, malice, or abuse, how can it be called rape?
Clearly in this case she is physically ready, the problem is determining her mental fitness. Is an 11 year old capable of that kind of understanding? Perhaps some are, but certainly most aren't. How could you determine which ones are? I don't know. Some specially designed psychological tests, I would imagine. Of course, that's awkward foreplay and it's not reasonable to set age of consent laws on a case-by-case basis.
You see, I am not promoting
lowering the age of consent to 11. I was asked if it should be legal to have sex with an 11 year old. I said that I didn't believe it was a simple yes or no question. If it could be proven harmless, it should be legal. I then voiced my doubt that it could be proven harmless and in conclusion made no recommendation to lower the age of consent laws. I was quite clearly saying that while theoretically there are cases where it is not harmful, I didn't believe any changes should be made to accommodate those incredibly rare situations.
You said essentially the same thing yourself.
People judge readiness by talking, and establishing recognition of potential consequences and risks. And establishing informed consent. Most 18-year-olds can do this. 17-year-olds slightly less so, 16-year-olds slightly less so, and so on.
Bold mine. And so on. So you've said most 18 year olds can do it, slightly less than most 17 years olds, slightly less than slightly less than most 16 year olds, and so on
. You did not specify at which point it reaches zero, the age at which 0% of children can establish informed consent. Now, compare that to my statement.
...the problem is determining her mental fitness. Is an 11 year old capable of that kind of understanding? Perhaps some are, but certainly most aren't.
We are both claiming that an incredibly small percentage of 11 years olds could establish informed consent. In fact I'm even opening suggesting the possibility that that percentage may be zero. That's what perhaps means there. Your "and so on" doesn't in any way suggest that the percentage at age 11 is zero.
But since there is no objective measure of this ability, societies simpy draw a line at a certain age, so everyone knows where they stand and there are no legal grey areas. It's artificial and arbitrary, but there's no workable alternative.
How could you determine which ones are? I don't know. Some specially designed psychological tests, I would imagine. Of course, that's awkward foreplay and it's not reasonable to set age of consent laws on a case-by-case basis.
We are both claiming that it is difficult or impossible to determine informed consent, and impractical to attempt it. While the age of consent is not perfect, it is acceptable and neither of us proposes an alternative solution.
Yet you characterize my statement as supporting legalizing child sex, and you believe your statement is completely different from mine.
I think 14 is a reasonable age to be considered an adult, and I think that should apply to both sexual consent and accountability for one's actions.Thanks for sharing, but who cares what you think, or what number you plucked out of thin air?
And, I don't believe you.
Well, this is just rude and stupid. We were having a discussion and sharing opinions. Should I dismiss every single statement
you make without accompanying facts and figures? Are we only here to regurgitate the thoughts of others or would it be terribly rude of me to have an original thought?
Also, 14 is not plucked out of thin air. 2394762936 is plucked out of thin air. 3589 is plucked out of thin air. In fact almost any number plucked out of thin air would be impractical as there are infinite numbers beyond the human life span. And if I did manage to pluck 14 out of thin air, it would be an amazing coincidence that it happens to be the same age of consent of many countries. Apparently they chose them at random too? Someone should call Steven Hawking, the odds of so many of us choosing the same number completely at random is astoundingly implausible. And the fact that that number is actually an appropriate answer as it's the approximate age at which most children have completed puberty is another unbelievable coincidence! Not only was the number chosen at random by so many people, but it's a plausible answer!
It's almost as if it were chosen after careful consideration and thought, but that's crazy. Who makes laws like that?