"As the age in such laws goes down, more harm will occur; as the age in such laws goes up, less harm occur" if i'm interpreting this correctly, this suggests there would be least harm if the age of consent were set at something very high, like 90. is this correct? even if your position is not that extreme, i suspect you're not considering harm caused by age of consent laws; harm caused by locking people in prisons, caused by forcefully separating two lovers, and related harms that are not results of age of consent laws in and of themselves but of the related cultural conditions that age of consent laws would not exist without; hysterical anti-pedophilia, attempts to make loved children believe they were abused, all forms of nocebogenic/iatrogenic harm. |