EGALE

[betsy]

I have read EGALE’s submission on Age of Consent to the Department of Justice Canada dated

March 30, 2000. However, just reading its introductions, I came across some statements that were rather unsettling.

"While EGALE supports the goal of protecting vulnerable persons from sexual abuse, we are concerned about the efficacy of raising the age of consent. In addition, EGALE has serious concerns about adverse impacts, including the impact on the goals of fostering autonomy, empowering youth and providing them with the tools to make informed decisions.

The setting of an absolute age of consent is an inevitably imperfect line drawing exercise. No matter where the line is drawn, some otherwise healthy sexual activity will be criminalized and some harmful activity will be permitted. Both effects are of concern, and both should be considered."

http://www.egale.ca/index.asp?lang=E&menu=37&item=348

"The setting of an absolute age of consent is an inevitably imperfect line drawing exercise. No matter where the line is drawn, some otherwise healthy sexual activity will be criminalized and some harmful activity will be permitted. Both effects are of concern, and both should be considered."

Does this paragraph suggests that there should be no absolute age of consent? That this is a subtle way of saying let's abolish the age of consent law?

Does "autonomy" means sexual and social self-determination?

[gerryhatrick]

Does this paragraph suggests that there should be no absolute age of consent? That this is a subtle way of saying let's abolish the age of consent law?

I read the article. It's not calling for an abolishment of an age of consent law. It talks about how such a law should be examined in the context of societal differences between sexual orientations.

[geoffrey]

Does this paragraph suggests that there should be no absolute age of consent? That this is a subtle way of saying let's abolish the age of consent law?

I read the article. It's not calling for an abolishment of an age of consent law. It talks about how such a law should be examined in the context of societal differences between sexual orientations.

How ridiculous. Just because they're different doesn't mean they get a different set of rules.

Saying that a functionally good law discriminates against gays because they should be able to have sex with younger people is completely against the fundamentals of any justice system in the world.

The law should ONLY be examined in the best interests of those that it protects, and thats children. I honestly don't care what some perverted pedophile thinks of the law. Gay rights have no position in the interest of protecting children. I can't believe a somewhat crediable organization like EGALE would even visit such a recommendation.

The argument thats made about a gay 14 year old getting teased so he needs to have an adult lover is so beyond justifiable it makes me sick.

I can't believe these people are the leading voice to gays in this country. If I was part of that movement, I'd be taking some swift action before the entire voice is discredited by such hideous suggestions of pedophilia.

Betsy, I'm sorry for not believing you completely at first. But an outright statement such as that has be convinced that there is an agenda here. And the evidence came right from the horse's mouth.

[gerryhatrick]

How ridiculous. Just because they're different doesn't mean they get a different set of rules.

I don't think I (or the article) said anything about a "different set of rules".

I honestly don't care what some perverted pedophile thinks of the law.

Is a 17 year old guy who has relations with a 14 year old girl a "perverted pedophile" in your view?

You're coming accross emotional and seem to have ignored the content of the article.

I personally don't think that anyone under 16 should be allowed to have sex with anyone 18 or over. I think 16 and 17 year olds should be able to consent with those within 4 years of thier age.

Now, with my proposal a 15 year old and an 18 year old would be criminal. I'm not totally comfortable with that either, if the relationship is a healthy one.

That is an example of the issue with an "absolute" consent law.

[geoffrey]

I don't think I (or the article) said anything about a "different set of rules".

Sure it is, changing the rules to include gays. We can't lower our societies standards to include people, people need to raise their standards to be included in our society.

Is a 17 year old guy who has relations with a 14 year old girl a "perverted pedophile" in your view?

You're coming accross emotional and seem to have ignored the content of the article.

I personally don't think that anyone under 16 should be allowed to have sex with anyone 18 or over. I think 16 and 17 year olds should be able to consent with those within 4 years of thier age.

Now, with my proposal a 15 year old and an 18 year old would be criminal. I'm not totally comfortable with that either, if the relationship is a healthy one.

That is an example of the issue with an "absolute" consent law.

A 17 year old guy who's having sex with a 14 year old is a perverted pedophile in my view. Whether its gay or not, a 14 year old having sex with a 17 year old probably has alot less to do with love and a lot more to do with the status of having an older partner.

So with your proposal, a 16 year old should be able to have sex with a 12 year old? I can tell you when I was 16 I wasn't interested in people that young, nor should anyone in a reasonable sense of mind. An 18 year old and a 15 year old can't possibly have a health relationship either.

Someone first year university and someone just getting into high school? I don't think so.

[gerryhatrick]

A 17 year old guy who's having sex with a 14 year old is a perverted pedophile in my view.

I disagree.

So with your proposal, a 16 year old should be able to have sex with a 12 year old?

Where the hell did you get that from?

Debate in good faith please.

[geoffrey]

A 17 year old guy who's having sex with a 14 year old is a perverted pedophile in my view.

I disagree.

So with your proposal, a 16 year old should be able to have sex with a 12 year old?

Where the hell did you get that from?

Debate in good faith please.

Uh you said 16 and 17 year olds should be able to have sex with people within 4 years of their age.

Let me do some math... 12+4=16.

Maybe the bigger question here is where are the parents?

[gerryhatrick]

Uh you said 16 and 17 year olds should be able to have sex with people within 4 years of their age.

That's unbelievable. If it was a 16 or 17 year old considering sex with a 12 or 13 year old respectively, why would I be making the point that the 16 or 17 year old should be able to "consent"?

It's obvious that the point refered to people OLDER that the 16 or 17 year old, and the fact that you'd look for a loophole to misinterpret the obvious casts doubt on your honesty concerning the entire issue.

[geoffrey]

Uh you said 16 and 17 year olds should be able to have sex with people within 4 years of their age.

That's unbelievable. If it was a 16 or 17 year old considering sex with a 12 or 13 year old respectively, why would I be making the point that the 16 or 17 year old should be able to "consent"?

It's obvious that the point refered to people OLDER that the 16 or 17 year old, and the fact that you'd look for a loophole to misinterpret the obvious casts doubt on your honesty concerning the entire issue.

An honest midunderstanding thats all. It's hard to tell what people believe when they support such claims as EGALE's.

[Madman]

How ridiculous. Just because they're different doesn't mean they get a different set of rules.

It's the government that's setting the different rules.. EGALE is asking that they be made the same across the board. What's your rationale for keeping the age of consent for the gay community higher than the rest?

[GostHacked]

I think the laws are fine the way they are. In this day an age, the younger generation with the Internet is very sexually aware. I never found out about sex till I was about 16, lost my virginity at 19. For me, even at 19, I was naive. It really comes down to how mature you are and what kind of respect you have for sex. My parents never told me about the birds n bees, I kind of learned it by sneakin a peek at dad's girlie mags and pornos. He never really did hide those well at all. It is different all over the planet. Some US states have the age of consent 13 or 12, cannot recall which ones. Even some European countires have similar laws as Canada. There should be a standard across the board though, I agree on at least that much. Actually, raise it to 16. If you really want to avoid alot of turmoil, be active in your children's life and let them know what is up. An educated kid will make smart decisions later in life. You can really make all the laws you want, but parents should know what their kids are doing. Some are mature enought to handle it, some arent. I think this may be the argument they are trying to put forth.

But just imagine, 120 years ago, a father would marry off his young daughter (12? and up) and he would give a chunk of land to them to live off of.

[betsy]

I can't believe these people are the leading voice to gays in this country. If I was part of that movement, I'd be taking some swift action before the entire voice is discredited by such hideous suggestions of pedophilia.

The Homosexual Community must wake up. I firmly believe that most gays are decent and do not even know what's afoot here. They are collectively getting tarnished by a group that is supposedly speaking for them.

[betsy]

Please keep in mind that suspicion and doubts are the reasons why there is so much resistance and accusations being hurled at gays in general. Yes, in general. Because groups like EGALE is purporting to represent and speak for all gays.

Just for the sake of comparison and argument, I have to re-post these on this topic.

ILGA's current positions on man/boy love and pedophilia are

explicit:

-- In 1985, ILGA adopted a position on "Age of Consent/Paedophilia/

Children's Rights" that urged member organizations to "lobby their

governments to abolish the age of consent law" so long as there is

"adequate protection for youth from being sexually abused without

the age of consent law."

-- In 1986, ILGA adopted a position that says the group "supports

the right of young people to sexual and social self-determination."

-- In 1988, ILGA declared "this conference recognizes that existing

same-sex age-of-consent laws often operate to oppress and not to

protect; that in many countries, existing laws on sexual coercion

and rules of evidence also often operate to oppress and not to

protect; that therefore member organizations are urged to consider

how best children, adolescents, and people of all ages can be

empowered and supported against both sexual coercion and sexual

oppression and to work towards that end."

-- In 1990, ILGA "calls on all members to treat all sexual

minorities with respect and to engage in constructive dialogue

with them. In another position adopted that year, ILGA declared

that it "supports the right of every individual, regardless of

age, to explore and develop her or his sexuality."

ILGA has also taken strong stands against sexual coercion. NAMBLA

helped write these positions, and our delegates supported them in the General

-----------------------

Pederasty and Homosexuality

by David Thorstad

Speech to the Semana Cultural Lesbica-Gay, Mexico City, June 26, 1998. More than 600 people showed up for the talk: standing room only, and many had to be turned away. [This is an English translation of the speech, which was given in Spanish]

"Our movement today stresses the liberation and empowerment of young people. Instead of pedagogy, democracy. Rather than a Greek love mentor-relationship, the companionship of independent and autonomous individuals. In place of male supremacy, a vision of sexual, economic, and political liberation for all. Freedom is indivisible. The liberation of children, women, boy-lovers, and homosexuals in general, can occur only as complementary facets of the same dream."

http://www.attrition.org/mirror/attrition/...1/pederasty.htm

--------------------------------

That introductory line of EGALE somehow echoes the policies of the ILGA and NAMBLA. The words had been re-hashed...the agenda seems to have been "re-packaged".

[betsy]

It's the government that's setting the different rules.. EGALE is asking that they be made the same across the board. What's your rationale for keeping the age of consent for the gay community higher than the rest?

Well, then how come EGALE won't support raising the age of consent? That would've made it uniform for everyone....heterosexual or not! Equality would've been achieved!

The stance of EGALE on resisting a proposed legislation that would make everyone equal under the law is what we are questioning here. After all, isn't "un-equality" what they are bleating about?

[Argus]

A 17 year old guy who's having sex with a 14 year old is a perverted pedophile in my view.

I disagree.

So do I. Let's try and keep our terms proper here, okay? A paedophile is an adult with a clinically diagnosed psychiatric condition who is aroused by pre-pubescent children. There is nothing whatever abnormal about a 17 year old lusting after a 14 year old.

I don't even necessarily find EGALE's statement that absolute age limits are wrong - to be wrong. I would not, for example, prosecute an 18 year old for having sex with a 17 year old, or a 15 year old for having sex with a 13 year old. However, that doesn't happen now, and would not have happened under the proposed change. What the law asked for, which EGALE opposed, was to raise the age of consent for adults to have sex with juveniles from 14 to 16 - while still keeping in place the 3 year limit for legal sex. In other words, it still would have been legal for a 17 year old to have sex with his 14 year old girlfriend. What would have been banned is 29 year olds having sex with 14 year olds.

And no one who opposed this - including EGALE, can claim they oppose grown men having sex with 14 year old children. They are explicitly endorsing this behaviour.

[betsy]

I never found out about sex till I was about 16, lost my virginity at 19. For me, even at 19, I was naive. It really comes down to how mature you are and what kind of respect you have for sex. My parents never told me about the birds n bees, I kind of learned it by sneakin a peek at dad's girlie mags and pornos. He never really did hide those well at all. It is different all over the planet. Some US states have the age of consent 13 or 12, cannot recall which ones. Even some European countires have similar laws as Canada. There should be a standard across the board though, I agree on at least that much. Actually, raise it to 16. If you really want to avoid alot of turmoil, be active in your children's life and let them know what is up. An educated kid will make smart decisions later in life. You can really make all the laws you want, but parents should know what their kids are doing. Some are mature enought to handle it, some arent. I think this may be the argument they are trying to put forth.

But just imagine, 120 years ago, a father would marry off his young daughter (12? and up) and he would give a chunk of land to them to live off of.

The concern for raising the age of consent is for children and youth protection. We've got a lot of problems to contend with around this issue...child pornography, child prostitution, AIDS and other STD are just some that comes to mind right now.

If EGALE truly bellieves that there ought to be equality and protection for the youth, then they ought to act on it. The rationale EGALE gave are quite flimsy for comfort.

Btw, as far as I'm concerned, there's no difference from a 14 year old heterosexual to a 14 year old LGBT.

Both can be exploited. Both can be coerced. Both needs protection.

[YankAbroad]

I would not, for example, prosecute an 18 year old for having sex with a 17 year old, or a 15 year old for having sex with a 13 year old.

Exactly, and rigid age laws do tend to hit these folks the hardest. You could be in a situation where a relationship was legal and then a date is hit and the relationship becomes illegal for the older person for a period of time, which makes no sense either.

I disagree with the notion that there shouldn't be limits to the age of consent. I don't believe 25 year olds should be sleeping with 14 year olds.

The concern for raising the age of consent is for children and youth protection

Perhaps, but raising the age does nothing to accomplish any of the other goals you've listed -- STD prevention, etc.

there's no difference from a 14 year old heterosexual to a 14 year old LGBT

Of course not, except that the 14 year old gay kid can expect to get nastier treatment from society and even from folks like you who argue he's going to try and be a pedophile when he grows up.

[gerryhatrick]

Well, then how come EGALE won't support raising the age of consent? That would've made it uniform for everyone....heterosexual or not! Equality would've been achieved!

The stance of EGALE on resisting a proposed legislation that would make everyone equal under the law is what we are questioning here. After all, isn't "un-equality" what they are bleating about?

I don't see your characterizations in the piece you linked. They are bringing up concerns.

It is not a "rationale" for anything as you state in a later post than this, it is a list of concerns and a stated hope that those concerns be addressed by any new legislation.

What is your answer to the specific concern regarding the unequal age of consent for anal and other types of sex, for example?

[betsy]

Perhaps, but raising the age does nothing to accomplish any of the other goals you've listed -- STD prevention, etc.

Of course it does. MATURITY.

It's bad enough that some adults that one would assume to be mature had acted so recklessly and irresponsibly...and we should expect more from a 14 year old?

To insist that a 14 year old is at par with a full-pledged adult is ludicrous. Either EGALE is ignorant in the make-up of this age-group...or deliberately enacting in a devious way to push a hidden agenda!

[YankAbroad]

Of course it does. MATURITY.

Why not raise it to age 30 then?

You've got to be reasonable. Raising it to an unusually high age just ensures that a bunch of high school kids are going to go out and try and discover this mystical forbidden thing you're trying to keep them from.

Maturity is developed by education and other activities as well. If you educate teens to have a mature outlook about sex, they'll be more sensible AND be more likely to resist inappropriate situations -- which is always a better outcome than after-the-fact prosecution.

EDIT: By the by, for gay kids, I'd love to see a pattern of education which offers them a vision of sex as something which is part of a relationship with a fellow adult in a committed relationship. But presuming that your opposition to sex education, relationship education and equality under the marriage laws is bona fide, such an outcome would also be impossible under your scenario. That's the danger of embracing extremes.

What is your answer to the specific concern regarding the unequal age of consent for anal and other types of sex, for example?

You're going to be waiting a while for that one (well, at least a meaningful response).

[betsy]

there's no difference from a 14 year old heterosexual to a 14 year old LGBT

Of course not, except that the 14 year old gay kid can expect to get nastier treatment from society and even from folks like you who argue he's going to try and be a pedophile when he grows up.

In what way would they get a nastier treatment from society?

Why would they get a nastier treatment? Gays are already tolerated in society.

Pedophiles are not.

Of course pedophiles will get a nastier treatment...whether they be heterosexual, homosexual, etc.,

Are you trying to say that a 14 year old gay kid is more likely to become a pedophile?

[YankAbroad]

In what way would they get a nastier treatment from society?

They get nastier treatment from society today, from people such as yourself for instance.

Why would they get a nastier treatment? Gays are already tolerated in society.

Not really, and certainly not universally.

And that's the thing.

Protecting children is all well and good, but right-leaning people and left-leaning people who blather on about protecting children only want to protect CERTAIN children, and leave other children to be "punished" for their "wrong" beliefs, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, political opinions, economic backgrounds, career goals, etc.

Are you trying to say that a 14 year old gay kid is more likely to become a pedophile?

You're the one who has been advancing the theory that all gays are pedophiles and that the gay rights movement is a giant cover for it, not me.

It's interesting how you insist you aren't when confronted with it, but keep "accidentally" revisiting this allegation.

It tells me you're far less interested in "protecting children" than you are in using the lives and welfare of kids as pieces on your political chessboard. Pretty despicable.

[betsy]

In what way would they get a nastier treatment from society?

They get nastier treatment from society today, from people such as yourself for instance.

Why would they get a nastier treatment? Gays are already tolerated in society.

Not really, and certainly not universally.

And that's the thing.

Protecting children is all well and good, but right-leaning people and left-leaning people who blather on about protecting children only want to protect CERTAIN children, and leave other children to be "punished" for their "wrong" beliefs, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, political opinions, economic backgrounds, career goals, etc.

Are you trying to say that a 14 year old gay kid is more likely to become a pedophile?

You're the one who has been advancing the theory that all gays are pedophiles and that the gay rights movement is a giant cover for it, not me.

It's interesting how you insist you aren't when confronted with it, but keep "accidentally" revisiting this allegation.

It tells me you're far less interested in "protecting children" than you are in using the lives and welfare of kids as pieces on your political chessboard. Pretty despicable.

Corrections, you're the one advancing the theory that all gays are pedophiles....by using me as a piece on your mis-guided or deliberate attempt in twisting facts.

I am not "accidentally" revisiting this premise. GRM eitheir deliberately or unwittingly entangled itself with pedophile groups. In spite all that had happened, and the uproar and effects it had created....it is amazing to see that EGALE, somehow had not learned from that mistake.

EGALE is passing up the opportunity to stand out and correct the negative perception on the Gay Community.

[betsy]

Well, then how come EGALE won't support raising the age of consent? That would've made it uniform for everyone....heterosexual or not! Equality would've been achieved!

The stance of EGALE on resisting a proposed legislation that would make everyone equal under the law is what we are questioning here. After all, isn't "un-equality" what they are bleating about?

I don't see your characterizations in the piece you linked. They are bringing up concerns.

It is not a "rationale" for anything as you state in a later post than this, it is a list of concerns and a stated hope that those concerns be addressed by any new legislation.

Yes, they are bringing up concerns. However, their introductions stating their position also seem to mirror the posted positions of ILGA and NAMBLA. Right now, I am reacting towards the particular introduction line.

Due to the past controversy involving ILGA and NAMBLA...and adverse consequences should EGALE make the wrong political move...it is only natural to assume that this group is treading on eggshells....but just re-packaging the same old agenda of ILGA in such a way that would sound acceptable to society.

I will have to re-read the lists of enumerated concerns.

[YankAbroad]

their introductions stating their position also seem to mirror the posted positions of ILGA and NAMBLA.

It was only a matter of time before betsy tried the old "NAMBLA is running EGALE" canard.

Sometimes, I think she spends more time thinking about pedophilia than the losers at NAMBLA do.