Welcome to Gaia! ::

The Teen Sex, Pregnancy and Puberty Guild

Back to Guilds

A guild for teenagers covering topics centering around teen sex, pregnancy, puberty, and other aspects of teen life. 

Tags: teens, puberty, sexuality, pregnancy, life issues 

Reply Sex Subforum
Article: Canada's Age of Consent Rises to 16

Quick Reply

Enter both words below, separated by a space:

Can't read the text? Click here

Submit

Nikolita
Captain

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 2:24 pm


Taken from the May 5th, 2008 edition of the Vancouver Sun. The article is by Denise Ryan.

[Nikolita Note: I will be updating the Age of Consent sticky after I post this. 3nodding ]

~

"Age of Consent [in Canada] Rises to 16"
Mother who lobbied for changes believes they will help parents protect 'at-risk' teenagers.

The age of sexual consent in Canada has risen from 14 to 16 under a new law that is part of the Conservative government's omnibus anti-crime legislation.

For Diane Sowden of Coquitlam, changes to the Criminal Code didn't come soon enough.

When her daughter became pregnant at the age of 14 by a 27 year old drug dealer, Sowden turned to police for help, only to discover she had no legal recourse. At 14, her daughter was considered an adult.

Although the older man was sexually involved with her daughter, introducing her to hard-core drugs and "sold" her to a pimp in Surrey over drug debts, there was technically no way to charge him with sexual exploitation.

Fifteen years later, after losing her daughter to a life of drug addiction and prostitution, Sowden, now 50, is raising two of her daughter's five children.

She believes changes to the law may help other parents keep at-risk children safe from the pain of a life such as the one her daughter has led, "on and off drugs, in and out of the Downtown East Side, unable to raise her children, known to police."

As Executive Director of the Children of the Street Society, Sowden has lobbied for years for changes to the Criminal Code.

"I'm overwhelmed that it's happened," Sowden told The [Vancouver] Sun "There were times that I never thought it would."

The Tackling Violent Crimes Act makes it illegal for adults to have sex with children under the age of 16. The legislation contains a "close-in-age" provision so that sexually active teens within less than 5 years of each other can have sex without breaking the law, as long as the older person is not in a position of authority.

The age of consent for a**l sex remains unchanged at 18.

The new "age of protection" legislation has been controversial with sexual health experts, but Sowden hopes it will deter Internet predators and ***** who target children, and provide parents with legal avenues to protect kids.

"The average age of young people being targeted for sexual abuse, for the sex trade and for Internet luring is 14 to 15," explains Sowden.

"In the US, the age of consent is 16 or 18 depending on the state. Canada has been favoured for sex tourism because of our lenient age and lagged on the Internet for the least amount of resistance from police and social workers."

The new law will take effect after Senate passage in February [2009], and is consistent with laws in countries such as Australia, the UK, the Netherlands, and some US states.

Critics have voiced concern that teens will misunderstand the law and refrain from seeking counselling, birth control, or medical help in cases of unwanted pregnancies.

Legislating sexual activity many push information about sexual health undergound, some youth workers and sexual health educators have argued.

But Sowden argues the benefits outweigh the risks.

"There is going to be a learning curve for police, social workers, and the general public to understand it, but the intent is not to criminalize sexual activity." Nor is it about setting moral standards, said Sowden.

"This will make it easier for a parent, a social worker, or a police officer to intervene when a child is at risk of being sexually exploited."

Sowden believes a law like this would have given her one more oppurtunity to help her daughter when problems arose.

"I was shocked that there was such a lack of intervention, that my child could be pregnant, using hard-core drugs and on the street, and no one could see her as a child in need of protection under the law."

Now, "even if a child believes they have consented, and agrees to sexual activity, if the adult is 5 years older, they can still be charged," said Sowden.

Sowden believes that educating social and youth workers, parents and kids will be of paramount importance to appropriate understanding and application of the new law.


~

Also this article: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/story.html?id=731fee39-10a0-4756-93f0-b709f69b5cf7&k=99942
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 3:48 pm


I think 14 is far too young to be having sex. I'm a senoir in highschool, and I'm almost 18. I look at the grade 9s and there is a large maturity gap when whe I compare them with other grades. I know when I was in grade 9 I thought I was so old and mature, I didn't know any better. I'm not saying I know everything now, but I've matured a lot in the past 4 years.

I don't know how I feel about the whole 5 year bumper. I think that when you're young 5 years is a lot to me. When you're older 5 years is not such a big deal but when you're young you're still not done growing and learning who you are... Someone that's 16 being sexually involved with someone who is 21 seems like a lot to me.

I wonder though, why is the age of consent for a**l sex different? Is there a specific reason for it? Is it concidered more dangerous?

Malina_Mango


darkecrow

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 3:56 pm


i think that is reasonable for them too do that
PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:01 pm


Malina_Mango


I wonder though, why is the age of consent for a**l sex different? Is there a specific reason for it? Is it concidered more dangerous?


I don't know. My first guess would be that it ties back to when homosexuality was illegal (say 30 years ago) and they made the age of consent 18. My second guess would be that they're worried about the spread of HIV/AIDS (which is dumb because you can get HIV/AIDS from vaginal sex too). But that's a good question, just one I don't know the answer to.

And I agree, 14 is way too young to be consenting to sex, especially with someone significantly older than you. 16 and 21 is a huge age gap at that age.

Nikolita
Captain


Aelfiede

PostPosted: Tue May 06, 2008 1:12 pm


Being Canadian, I'm very glad the government decided to do that. I also prone a late teenage years sexuality. 17 years old is acceptable to me. But 16 is a much better than 14 already.

Of couuuurse the new law won't lower the quantity of young teens that have sex. But it will surely help young girls who are abused to win in court. It's hard to win a trial against a 16 years old boy who had sex with you against your will at a party when you are a 14 years old girl. All the boy has to do is say "Well she was conscentant that night." and if it's his first offense, he'll be freed without consequences.

As for the "5 years gap" betwen the partners... The real problem with the age of conscent is that it is very much case per case. It's hard to create one huge generic law and say it applies to all. Some 14 year old girls have sex with a 14 year old boy and never regret it. Good for them. And then some 16 year old girls have sex with a 20 years old boy and can regret it after. It's different for everyone.

But yup. Overall the new laws are excellent. Some very good news here. Thanks for posting it up!
PostPosted: Tue May 06, 2008 5:35 pm


Nikolita
Malina_Mango


I wonder though, why is the age of consent for a**l sex different? Is there a specific reason for it? Is it concidered more dangerous?


I don't know. My first guess would be that it ties back to when homosexuality was illegal (say 30 years ago) and they made the age of consent 18. My second guess would be that they're worried about the spread of HIV/AIDS (which is dumb because you can get HIV/AIDS from vaginal sex too). But that's a good question, just one I don't know the answer to.

And I agree, 14 is way too young to be consenting to sex, especially with someone significantly older than you. 16 and 21 is a huge age gap at that age.
I did a little bit of research, this is what I found...


Quote:
However, that statement is categorically false, speaking strictly from a medical standpoint. Even those who support homosexual sex acts warn nonetheless that a**l sex is a dangerous activity, regardless of genders involved. The sex info site of the University of California at Santa Barbara, which can in no way be described as opposed to homosexual activity, nonetheless points out that a**l sex is a dangerous practice.

Experts on sexual behaviour, or "sexperts" at the site refers to them, warn that a**l sex is the most dangerous behaviour for transmission of HIV/AIDS and all other STDs since the a**s is not designed for sexual activity as is the v****a. Moreover, the 'sexperts' warn that the practice also leads to fecal incontinence - loss of normal control of the sphincter muscles which leads to stool leaking from the rectum at unexpected times.

As the website puts it: "Even when people use lots of lubrication during a**l sex, there can be tearing of the tissue inside the a**s . . . For this reason, a**l sex is the riskiest form of sexual activity when it comes to the transmission of HIV/AIDS.

"Tiny tears in the a**l tissue are like giant superhighways for the HIV viruses, allowing them to get inside the body and enter the blood system. a**l tears provide an opening for all the other STDs as well.

"It may be possible for repetitive a**l sex to lead to weakening of the a**l sphincter, which is the muscle that tightens after we defecate. Once weakened, feces can escape the a**s against our will."
(see the website http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/sexinfo/?article=faq&refid=125 WARNING: graphic sketches used to illustrate)

Nevertheless, the National Post backed the EGALE request in an unsigned editorial Saturday February 11. The editorial titled, "Equalize the age of consent" said "Section 159 of the Criminal Code specifically bans a**l intercourse between unmarried people under 18. This is plainly discriminatory, a prohibition intended to stigmatize homosexual or bisexual teenagers, suggesting that the nature of their sexual relationship requires special added protection. This is nonsense." (see the editorial - paid subscription required - http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/editorialsletters/st... )


Taken from http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/feb/06021403.html

It makes sense. The tears, and the problems you could get with your bowls.

Malina_Mango


bustinrs2kickurs

Melodious Darling

7,550 Points
  • Partygoer 500
  • Object of Affection 150
  • Person of Interest 200
PostPosted: Wed May 07, 2008 1:14 pm


I happen to be doing a research paper and used this now in my paper so thank you so much for posting it!

I think the 5 year gap is a perfect law and idea. I have been reading many cases (because of my research paper) that many teens do not even realize the age of consent and have sex and the male is using put and jail and has to register as a sex offender for life. This can really ruin lives so that 5 year gap is a good idea.
PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 8:49 am


I am fine with 16, 14 doesn't really sound right to me.
Maybe I live in the suburbia, I hardly hear Grade 9s having sex, but silly me, I don't even think they talk about it in public.

Anyways, it doesn't apply to me because I am thinking that I won't even have my first until sometime in university.

Cuperdon

2,050 Points
  • Contributor 150
  • Forum Dabbler 200
Reply
Sex Subforum

 
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum