finkelhor

No. The use of "consent" in the debate about sex originated in the paper by David Finkelhor: "WHAT'S WRONG WITH SEX BETWEEN ADULTS AND CHILDREN? Ethics and the Problem of Sexual Abuse". Ammerican journal of Orthopsychiat 49(4), October 1979, pages 692-697. He argues that the position of children being "incapable of full and informed consent will provide a more solid and consistent approach of the problem". On page 693 he writes: "But children are sexual; the asexuality of childhood is a myth. Most children are curious about sex. They explore sexuality with one another. In fact, when adults shield children from sex, it probably does more harm than good." This statement has to be interpreted in the context of 1979, where homosexuality started to get accepted, despite moral norms. Hence, the attempt to replace the failing "moral ground" with something else. His argument on consent (page 694): "Because they are children, they cannot consent; they can never consent." He then writes about research subjects giving "informed consent" to participation. Regarding children's consent to sex it is always about lacking knowledge. On page 696 he then writes about "some caveats", where he admits that even sex between adults most often lacks the full informed consent. And then he cites the lack of power. Every reader of Nabokov's Lolita will disagree. Regarding harm to children, he writes on page 696: "It is indisputable that some children are harmed by their childhood sexual encounters with adults, some severely so. But what percentage? From clinical reports, we cannot tell. The number of cases that do not come to clinical attention is very large (cites 2), and it is possible that a majority of these children are not harmed (cites 3 and 4)." 2 = Finkelhor, D. 1979. Sexually Victimized Children. Free Press. New York. 3 = Gagnon, J. 1965. Female child victims of sex offenses. Soc. Prob. 13:176-192 4 = Landis, J. 1965. Experiences of 500 children with adult sexual deviates. Psych. Quart. Supplm. 30:91-109. ------------- end of citations ------- The whole thing collapses on the "consent" term. Children are masters in playing and have a keen sense of fairness. They always know whether they are enjoying the play at a moment or not. And sex is more like a dance than a medical procedure, where one is unconscious. A dance stops when one partner no longer moves - the same should be valid for all sex. And children are capable of expressing dissent. Every toddler in front of the candy shelf in a store should convince you.