FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Consent - age and pornography

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

I hope I don't get a slap on the wrist for this but we had a debate today at work after reading a local newspaper article and I thought I'd throw it out to the wolves to get their opinions.

Basically a man (20) is being taken to crown court for possession of indecent images. Allegedly, the women they are of are 17 years old.

So there is a discrepancy between the age of consent and the age to consent to having pornographic images of yourself taken (16 and 18 respectively).

Is it wrong that the ages are different?

Should a lad be taken to court and but on the sex offenders list for taking pictures of someone of a legal age?

I'm really not too sure what I think about it all.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

I think that both parties were too young to realise the full consequences and that the law should be clearer. In my opinion if 16 is the age of consent to sex it should be the age of consent to ALL types of consensual activity......I was going to say legal but of course that isn't the case here.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

I suppose it also depends on the content of the pictures being legal.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Of course he shouldn't , I was married with a son at 17 , bloody stupid law

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

There are several confusing factors here:-

* the intention behind the original legislation

* discretion of the police & CPS as whether or not to charge & prosecute

* then the outcome of any trial

This sounds like a test case and tricky cases, such as this, make it harder for subsequent prosecutions.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think that both parties were too young to realise the full consequences and that the law should be clearer. In my opinion if 16 is the age of consent to sex it should be the age of consent to ALL types of consensual activity......I was going to say legal but of course that isn't the case here."

This

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I don't know the full facts of this case so difficult to comment with authority on it but on the face of it it does seem like another contradictory situation, a bit like where a lad of 16 can join the army but can't buy a video game where people get shot up.

If it's a boyfriend / girlfriend consentual thing it does appear harsh if he ends up on the sex offenders register for possessing something that I guess most teens do and share elsewhere

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ee VianteWoman
over a year ago

Somewhere in North Norfolk

I think the differences in the age of consent are daft.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I believe that there have been cases of school children ending up on the sex offenders registrar due to making and distributing child pornography. Also known as sexting. And if that is true, and like the scenario Lib! is discussing the law is victimising the people it is designed to protect.

If there was no coercion involved and the images were being shared consensually I don't see why that should be illegal

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ee VianteWoman
over a year ago

Somewhere in North Norfolk

You're allowed to have sex at 16 but not watch porn films of other people having sex until you're 18.

That makes no sense at all to me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rcticFoxxxWoman
over a year ago

Hereabouts

Forgive me if I'm wrong.. But I read somewhere that if both participants are under the age of 16 (I believe it's 13-15) then neither can be charged with statutory rape. If this is true then if a male/female turned 16 in January, and their partner turned 16 in February, then for that month the older partner could be charged... I know it's a little off topic, but the laws on sex are extremely grey. I don't think he should be put on the register for having photos, unless she didn't consent to them. And by this I mean, consenting at the time, having full knowledge of every image he has, and if she didn't ask him to delete any of them that he has.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Kids experiment, they have feelings for other kids and that can mean they end up having sex. It's fairly innocent when it's like this.

People doing a performance for someone elses titilation makes it's an offence. It's teaching someone it's ok to be used as a sexual object, although the sexualisation of men and women is open in our society anyway so it's kind of mixed messages here.

Watching porn is also influencing a child sexually.

It makes sense if you ignore how the media is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ee VianteWoman
over a year ago

Somewhere in North Norfolk


"Kids experiment, they have feelings for other kids and that can mean they end up having sex. It's fairly innocent when it's like this.

People doing a performance for someone elses titilation makes it's an offence. It's teaching someone it's ok to be used as a sexual object, although the sexualisation of men and women is open in our society anyway so it's kind of mixed messages here.

Watching porn is also influencing a child sexually.

It makes sense if you ignore how the media is.

"

It's legal for any adult to have sex with a 16 year old though, so we're not just talking about two innocent youngsters together.

The more experienced partner could be teaching the other all sorts of things, some of which could be much "worse" (for want of a better word) than they'd see in some porn.

Also, watching it is less risky because pregnancy or disease transmission isn't possible. Both are possible when actually having sex. Yet the actually having sex has a lower age of consent.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ust RachelTV/TS
over a year ago

Horsham


"I don't know the full facts of this case so difficult to comment with authority on it but on the face of it it does seem like another contradictory situation, a bit like where a lad of 16 can join the army but can't buy a video game where people get shot up.

If it's a boyfriend / girlfriend consentual thing it does appear harsh if he ends up on the sex offenders register for possessing something that I guess most teens do and share elsewhere"

Depends if there are outside influences, like her parents taking this further, his or her background or history.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We're the pic's being shared with other's?

That could be the reason behind it.

Maybe he was passing them around?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Some time in the 1980s the age for publishing nude pics in "men's magazines" was raised from 16 to 18.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Kids experiment, they have feelings for other kids and that can mean they end up having sex. It's fairly innocent when it's like this.

People doing a performance for someone elses titilation makes it's an offence. It's teaching someone it's ok to be used as a sexual object, although the sexualisation of men and women is open in our society anyway so it's kind of mixed messages here.

Watching porn is also influencing a child sexually.

It makes sense if you ignore how the media is.

It's legal for any adult to have sex with a 16 year old though, so we're not just talking about two innocent youngsters together.

The more experienced partner could be teaching the other all sorts of things, some of which could be much "worse" (for want of a better word) than they'd see in some porn.

Also, watching it is less risky because pregnancy or disease transmission isn't possible. Both are possible when actually having sex. Yet the actually having sex has a lower age of consent."

Just remembered i've had pics taken of me by an older guy i was seeing when i was 17, i didn't see anything wrong with it at the time but when we split up he wouldn't give me the pics back and i didn't want him to have them. Might be something to do with this coz i didn't know what to do after that to get them back?

Might just be the law is protecting those under age for some things, but cba to deal with it once you're an adult, because of public pressure i reckon. If we're honest loads of illegal stuff goes on and the justice system doesn't do anything about it unless pressured to do so.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"I hope I don't get a slap on the wrist for this but we had a debate today at work after reading a local newspaper article and I thought I'd throw it out to the wolves to get their opinions.

Basically a man (20) is being taken to crown court for possession of indecent images. Allegedly, the women they are of are 17 years old.

So there is a discrepancy between the age of consent and the age to consent to having pornographic images of yourself taken (16 and 18 respectively).

Is it wrong that the ages are different?

Should a lad be taken to court and but on the sex offenders list for taking pictures of someone of a legal age?

I'm really not too sure what I think about it all."

Depends what he's being taken to court for.

Is it ownership of them?

Distribution of them ?

It can't be illegal for him to take them with her consent or for them to have sex but legally she is still a minor.

Where can I read about the case ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

Just read a case where a 24 year old was jailed cos he sent pics of a 17 year old to his friends.

She is a minor and it was without her consent.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ee VianteWoman
over a year ago

Somewhere in North Norfolk


"Kids experiment, they have feelings for other kids and that can mean they end up having sex. It's fairly innocent when it's like this.

People doing a performance for someone elses titilation makes it's an offence. It's teaching someone it's ok to be used as a sexual object, although the sexualisation of men and women is open in our society anyway so it's kind of mixed messages here.

Watching porn is also influencing a child sexually.

It makes sense if you ignore how the media is.

It's legal for any adult to have sex with a 16 year old though, so we're not just talking about two innocent youngsters together.

The more experienced partner could be teaching the other all sorts of things, some of which could be much "worse" (for want of a better word) than they'd see in some porn.

Also, watching it is less risky because pregnancy or disease transmission isn't possible. Both are possible when actually having sex. Yet the actually having sex has a lower age of consent.

Just remembered i've had pics taken of me by an older guy i was seeing when i was 17, i didn't see anything wrong with it at the time but when we split up he wouldn't give me the pics back and i didn't want him to have them. Might be something to do with this coz i didn't know what to do after that to get them back?

Might just be the law is protecting those under age for some things, but cba to deal with it once you're an adult, because of public pressure i reckon. If we're honest loads of illegal stuff goes on and the justice system doesn't do anything about it unless pressured to do so."

Would you have known at 18 what to do?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Such cases are never black and white.

Precedents cannot be set by seemingly sensible leniency. Such a precedent in an area so controversial is open to future misuse which could backfire in the worst way.

(If that makes sense? It does in my head!)

I was an incredibly level-headed and mature seventeen year-old. But I still don't think I was equipped with sufficient life experience to agree to pornographic images of myself being taken and published.

The law may seem an ass, at times. But it's usually for very good reasons.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Kids experiment, they have feelings for other kids and that can mean they end up having sex. It's fairly innocent when it's like this.

People doing a performance for someone elses titilation makes it's an offence. It's teaching someone it's ok to be used as a sexual object, although the sexualisation of men and women is open in our society anyway so it's kind of mixed messages here.

Watching porn is also influencing a child sexually.

It makes sense if you ignore how the media is.

It's legal for any adult to have sex with a 16 year old though, so we're not just talking about two innocent youngsters together.

The more experienced partner could be teaching the other all sorts of things, some of which could be much "worse" (for want of a better word) than they'd see in some porn.

Also, watching it is less risky because pregnancy or disease transmission isn't possible. Both are possible when actually having sex. Yet the actually having sex has a lower age of consent.

Just remembered i've had pics taken of me by an older guy i was seeing when i was 17, i didn't see anything wrong with it at the time but when we split up he wouldn't give me the pics back and i didn't want him to have them. Might be something to do with this coz i didn't know what to do after that to get them back?

Might just be the law is protecting those under age for some things, but cba to deal with it once you're an adult, because of public pressure i reckon. If we're honest loads of illegal stuff goes on and the justice system doesn't do anything about it unless pressured to do so.

Would you have known at 18 what to do?"

No, wouldn't even know what to do now if i'm honest.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ee VianteWoman
over a year ago

Somewhere in North Norfolk


"Such cases are never black and white.

Precedents cannot be set by seemingly sensible leniency. Such a precedent in an area so controversial is open to future misuse which could backfire in the worst way.

(If that makes sense? It does in my head!)

I was an incredibly level-headed and mature seventeen year-old. But I still don't think I was equipped with sufficient life experience to agree to pornographic images of myself being taken and published.

The law may seem an ass, at times. But it's usually for very good reasons."

With the perspective of my 40's I don't think I had enough life experience even at 18 to understand the potential future repercussions of having pornographic photos taken (even if not published).

I have a different opinion now to when I was in my early 30's, so I had no chance of a fully rounded view in my teens.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lactontogMan
over a year ago

Clacton on Sea

Yes you need this law as people will push the boundaries, this is why i shoot ladies 40+ as filming younger women is a minefield.

In 20 years of using model releases then both model releases an photo ID i have never been ask to prove some ones age but other togs i know shooting young women have.

If we say a 17 yr old doing naughty pics is ok how could we justify a person having to be over 18 to watch porn, bo it was a good call fetching this case to court simply for the fact its fetched attention that its illegal to film minors.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *Brinksy xxWoman
over a year ago

Halesowen

This is an interesting debate. I would however, have to see the full article as there are too many what ifs! I suspect that the media have twisted a story to suit.

On the face of it if he was caught abusing the photos then yes he should be prosecuted no matter what the age of the female.

My opinion as to whether he should be on the sex offenders register differs as this unfortunately is not graded and there is no differentiation between people who are on it. If you are on it, society has already decided you are guilty of the worst possible offence.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

I'm afraid the article was nothing more than a paragraph of a few lines, so there isn't any more information (flimsy journalism in a local rag).

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top