Alyssa Free on Nostr: Three appeals for abolishing age to consent to sex; On the grounds of abuse ...

Three appeals for abolishing age to consent to sex; On the grounds of abuse prevention, on the grounds of harm reduction, and on the grounds of liberation.

Introduction:

Prohibition and shame are notoriously poor behavior moderators, with a large contingent of people continuing to transgress taboo whether knowingly or unknowingly. Our present society continues to prioritize punishment of deviance from established norms despite this, and this severely limits the available range of acceptable responses. People under an age of minority are denied the right to consent, in sex as with many other things, and this lack of capacity is thought to be a natural and irreducible trait of youth as well as in their best interest. I will argue in three ways why the abolition of minority, specifically in the capacity of consenting to sex and relationships, would be better for young people than our repressive status quo.

Abolition of minority as abuse prevention:

Interpersonal abuse is complicated and frustrating to try to intervene with. No abuse case is ideal, and unfortunately no measure will make it all go away. However, effective options increase the chances to avoid entering into abusive situations, or to extract oneself when already in an abusive situation. It may be that going to the police to report some kind of crime being done feels most viable for some victims of abuse, yet for others they may want to move away or arrange an intervention. Many people feel hopeless if they think they are stuck between cops and nothing, yet under the conditions of minority, young people being abused may face that very dilemma.

Education about relationships, including abusive dynamics to be aware of, is difficult to advocate under conditions of prohibition; It suffices in the minds of the normative to tell young people "Just say no then run and tell an adult," when that is woefully inadequate for many victims of abuse. Some victims may be implicated in crimes themselves, some may be protective of their abuser out of affection or family obligation, and some may simply be shit scared of the cops. Victims need more options for escaping their abusers. Victims advocacy groups could work publicly with people of all ages to get them work and alternate housing without the need to involve police if young people had all of the options that older victims have, and this would prevent abuse and re-abuse.

As further regards the prevention abuse, we must not forget the role of institutions as abusers. Bureaucracies of control don't recognize the simple truth that abuse is not ideal, and they have standard models of what a victim or an abuser will be. Deviate from the expected model of victimhood and you will be abused by the state officials until you conform. Limiting the excuses police have to subject people to interrogation prevents abuse.

Abolition of minority as harm reduction:

Many sexual (or other interpersonal) relationships are burdened by harms not characterized by abuse but by dysfunction, and prohibition makes these dysfunctions far worse. A child in a sexual relationship with an adult may only talk to that adult about the relationship, with any outside voices constituting a threat to their health and safety since any of them could go to the police. Without the minority, seeking outside advice for relationship troubles would be much easier to do for both the adult and child, each of whom may have questions or concerns about how their relationship is going. By isolating and threatening anyone in these taboo relationships, dysfuction can escalate into traumatic problems where a safe and supported dynamic might not.

As regards victims of abuse who are continuing to be abused and may or may not escape from it, even they would be harmed less without the burden of minority; the prohibition, the taboo on child sexuality revictimizes those who are raped because part of the disgust and horror people have is over the notion of 'lost innocence'. A world that does not charge children with the expectation of maintaining innocence would be better able to hear a young victim of rape without treating them with the same degree of hostility and suspicion often experienced in our present day society. Therefore, even for abuse victims who are helped in no other way, no longer being a minor could reduce the total harms they experience and they would retain some dignity to advocate themselves if options to escape their abuse manifested.

Abolition of minority as liberation:

There is simply no interpretation of any minority or officially mandated incapacity which could be even remotely liberatory. If you expected a chapter, this time it's just a call for justice. Abolish the minority, every minority, or you are an authoritarian adultist. The end