|
|
|
|
|
by mindover
1254 days ago
|
|
Yes, at that time men under the age of 21 were considered children not being able to give consent specifically to having gay sex. However, men of the same age were not considered children when having straight sex. Do you see a problem with that? More importantly, are you as furious that _today_ children as young as 13 are able to give consent in many mostly republican states in the US? Are you OK with 13 y.o. girls being able to give consent in Tennessee? It’s happening today in your own country, led by your own party, not in France 50 years ago. |
|
What is "my own party" and what is "my own country", are you not making unwarranted assumptions?
Absent strong social pressure, humans tend to start having sex when they reach puberty. I doubt that there is even one human on the planet who does not have ancestors that had children at 13. Why is this relevant?
What is not acceptable, as you know very well, is genital mutilation of children without consent (children cannot give consent) that renders them permantently infertile and dysorgasmic. Stop defending child abuse!
[1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/07/26/the-german-exp...