Although he does not advocate complete abolition, Francis Bennion, a British liberal humanist who was also influenced by the historical context of the issue, pointed to the fact that children are „sexual beings“ and concluded that this in itself made legal prohibitions unjust. [43] We all have the right to change our minds at any time. Or agree to do one sexual thing with someone, but not another. The Penal Code Amendment Act limited the blackmail of „precocious“ girls by including a clause exonerating men of all ages who had „reasonable grounds“ to believe that a girl between the ages of 13 and 15 was over the age of 16; Any girl who looks older than her age is therefore not automatically protected by the law. This decision was based on comments such as those of Sir Thomas Chambers in 1885, who pointed out that the Sexual Consent Act should be based on „fairness to both parties“ and that „a 13-year-old girl may have looked much older than she was; It could be that she is not the seduced, but the seductress. In 1922, the „reasonable faith clause“ was limited to the first crimes committed by men under the age of 24. However, it was extended again in 2003 after a 2001 case law (R v K [2001] 3 W.L.R. 471 HL) concluded that a 26-year-old accused could be acquitted of a crime committed against a 14-year-old girl if he „honestly believed“ that she was over 16. 17. In October 2010, BBC Sunday Morning Live asked the public about its textual inquiry: „Should the age of consent be lowered to 13?“ At the end of the program, it was announced that 16% voted yes and 84% voted no. [29] Since the 1970s, there have been a number of movements in the United Kingdom to reform or abolish the age of consent, support for children`s rights, homosexual liberation or, more recently, „as a means of preventing unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections through education and health promotion.“ [1] [2] This guidance document does not advocate raising or lowering the age of sexual consent, arguing that understanding how and why the 1885 Act came into being is a crucial basis for any discussion of amending it. Overall, this shows that policymakers cannot make simplistic comparisons with the past when advocating or opposing change.
Many of the factors that shaped the Sexual Consent Act in 1885 are no longer social concerns, while new factors (such as teenage pregnancy and „pedophilia“) have become priorities. An open conversation is needed to recognize these changes and decide which parts of the old law serve their purpose in a changing society. Spain had one of the lowest ages of consent on the continent at just 13, but recently agreed to raise that age to 16. Currently, the age of consent for penetrative sex, oral sex and mutual masturbation in the UK is 16. If a person has sexual intercourse with a person under that age, they can be charged with a felony and can be sentenced to 14 years in prison or, if under 18, 5 years` imprisonment. [11] Similarly, the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000 prohibits a person in a position of trust from engaging in sexual acts with any person who cannot consent, including minors and „very vulnerable persons.“ [12] It is primarily used to protect individuals who are over the age of consent but under the age of 18 or have a mental disability. [13] [14] The history of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885 cannot tell us how old the age of consent should be. However, it shows us that the meaning and purpose of sexual consent law changes over time and that direct comparisons with the past must be made with caution. Policymakers who claim that the age of consent does not need to be re-examined because of its roots in „child protection“ overlook the fact that the 1885 law was shaped in part by a desire to control young people. It is also all too easy to argue for raising or lowering the age of consent based on individual factors such as the age of puberty or expected sexual activity. Direct comparisons to a 130-year-old society and a 130-year-old legal system – whether reform is encouraged or opposed – are misplaced, as is the idea that a law rooted in Victorian concerns and values can respond appropriately to those of our own society.
Ideas about age, gender and sexuality change with society, and decision-makers need to recognize these differences in order to move forward. The age of consent in England and Wales is 16. This is the age at which young people can legally participate in sexual activity. There is also a fundamental difference between the nineteenth century and today in the perceived effects of the law for those beyond the age of consent. Sexual consent is now understood by many—but not all—as a marker of when girls (and boys) are allowed or likely to have sex, as well as an indicator of their capacity to consent. For Victorians, sexual consent was certainly not a recommended or permissible age for sexual activity. The Sexual Consent Act of 1885 meant, to quote the Royal Commissioners on the Care and Control of the Feeble-Minded of 1908, that „[t]he power to consent to unlawful desecration. was taken by girls under the age of sixteen.“ This formulation is significant: the right to consent was „taken away“ from girls under the age of consent, rather than given to those over it. Few commentators advocated extramarital sex, which should take place in the mid-20s and not at the legal age of marriage (14 for boys and 12 for girls) or the age of sexual consent.
Overall, the history of the 1885 Act shows that some of our discussions today on the Sexual Consent Act could be productively reshaped. Discussions about the age of sexual consent need to be based on questions – albeit difficult and emotional – about how the meaning of „sexual consent“ has changed over time, the historical legacy of victims` accusations of „precocity,“ and whether a two-tier sexual consent system appropriately responds to evolving knowledge about the range of „normal“ sexual experiences and maturity. Sexual. The law also states that people under the age of 13 cannot consent to sexual activity under any circumstances – even if they are close to them at an advanced age. This means that participating in any type of sexual activity with someone under the age of 12 is still a crime. Peter Tatchell, a British gay activist and author, has championed the age of consent of 14 in Britain since the mid-1990s, repeating arguments made by the NCCL and the Sexual Law Reform Society in the 1970s. He called Romeo and Juliet, 14 and 13, „one of the greatest love stories of all time.“ [41] [42] In the mid-1970s, arguments for a lower minimum age for all gained wider support, raising questions about the merits of lowering the legal age for male/female sexual behavior – not only within grassroots sexual movements, but also within religious organizations and liberal intellectual circles. […] Significant sections of liberal opinion in the political mainstream, including prominent advocates for children`s interests and sexual health, support at least selective decriminalization of sexual activity among youth under the age of 18. [28] There is also the issue of education – or lack of education – in schools and at home regarding sexual consent and behaviour. Lowering the age of consent is therefore not necessarily the solution. In the United Kingdom, the age of male homosexual consent was set at 21 in the Sexual Offences Act 1967 (as recommended in the Wolfenden Report), then reduced to 18 in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 and finally to 16 in England and Wales and Scotland in the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000. [10] Please note, however, that these are just a few examples of what consent does not look like.