Youth groups tell Sente to keep consent age at 14
AGE OF CONSENT / 'This is not what youth want', group tell Senators
BrentCreelman / National / Friday, February 22, 2008
Share |

Raising the age of consent is a veiled attempt to assert conservative moral values on youth, queer and youth-led groups told Senators today.

The Senate's legal affairs committee is studying a Harper government bill that would raise the age of consent from 14 to 16. It will almost certainly pass — no political party has opposed it but queer and youth-led groups came out Feb 22 to insist on their sexual freedom.

The proposed changes will have a disproportionate impact on gays, said Richard Hudler of the Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Rights in Ontario.

"My first lover was 17 years older than me. And this is common [among gay people]," he said. "It is dangerous considering the attitude toward sexual orientation in schools for a young person to attempt to make sexual contact with a peer."

Other presenters pushed that point home: changing Canada's consent laws will only punish those in consensual relationships. Despite the government rhetoric of "protecting the youth", the proposed consent laws do little to actually protect youth, presenters argued.


"It won't stop real sexual abuse," said Nick Dodds of the Age of Consent Committee, a youth-led group.

Research shows most sexual abuse overwhelmingly occurs within the family, said Hudler. Raising the age of consent does nothing to protect youth in that situation, he noted.

Queer groups also spoke against the discriminatory age of consent for anal sex. Under Canada's Criminal Code, anal sex is only legal if both individuals are 18 years old. The Commons justice committee had a chance to strike down the law last year, but the chair Conservative MP Art Hanger refused.

"This factor sends a strong message to the gay community that hostility toward same-sex relationships is a motivating factor behind this legislation," said Hudler.


"The bill is homophobic," agreed Jeremy Dias, executive director of Jer's Vision, a youth group that seeks to end discrimination in schools. "Why can't a gay male youth make sexual decisions until he's 18?"

Perhaps most exciting was that youth overcame the barriers posed by the Parliamentary process to speak at the Senate committee.

"I'm here today to tell you that this is not what youth want," said Dodds, 19, who argued that more proactive attempts should have been made to hear from youth.

During the question and answer period, Conservative Senator Terry Stratton played into the fear of child exploitation, saying that parents are "petrified" about luring, particularly on the Internet. He also said tougher consent laws are needed to stop youth from being pulled into prostitution.

But Cheryl Milne of the Justice for Children and Youth set him straight.

"The example you gave is, quite frankly, already illegal," she responded. "We don't need more draconian laws that take away from the nuances and target youth."

The Senate will continue hearings on the Conservative government's omnibus crime bill which include the age of consent changes until at least Feb 25.



Share |


Reader Comments


 
age of consent needs to be raised
i have to totally disagree with those who dont think the age of consent needs to be raised. i came out at 15 in the winter of 1979 and it was too young. at that young age you do not have enough life experience to make decisions about sex. shortly after coming out i got into prostitution . i was 16. it wasnt uncommon in those years to see 50-60 boys, most under 18 and some as young as 13, walking the stroll (bay st, grenville st, grosvenor st , maitland sts and by womens college hospital) and there were often just as many tricks if not more. as i stated above, youth are not capable of making a decision like that and in this day and age with hiv (and you get people who do not disclose their status) hep c ,both of which are life threatening disease's, need the protection fo the age of consent act and raising that would be a benefit to them.
jason, gvrd bc
02/22/08 9:11 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Canada's age of consent too low but...
I'm a gay man writing from Sydney, Australia where the age of consent is 16 for both straight and gay people and I think 14 is too young. I think Canada should raise it to 16, but give police and courts discretion on whether to press charges and the application of the law in cases where the older partner is over 16 but under 18 or in their early 20's. I disagree with Gary Hudler- his first partner may have been 17 years older than him, and the relationship may have been consensual, but if he is saying that he was under 16 at the time, then that man had absolutely no business being in a relationship with him. Someone 17 years older than you is not a "peer" and it is immoral and exploitative for adults to seek out relationships with teens even when those relationships are legal and consensual. If teens in the past have had to seek out older men to explore their sexuality it is only because homophobic environments have prevented them from finding partners of their own age and I would say that the few who do today, do so for the same reason. I also disagree with Hudler's suggestion that "May-to-December" relationships are widespread in the gay community. However, the law on anal sex should be removed completely. Governments should not be in the business of telling people what sex acts are acceptable or appropriate between consenting partners in legal relationships in the privacy of their own bedroom- that is a fundamental human rights issue for all people straight or gay. I also suspect that having the age of consent at 14 may be a contributing factor to why some mainstream Canadians may have issues with changing the anal sex law. Maybe you'll need to raise one to lower the other?
Andrew, Sydney Australia
02/23/08 1:18 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Raising the AOC is the wrong way to protect youth.
As one of the people who testified in front of the Senate, I think it's important to state why it is that raising the age of consent is undesirable. Aside from the public health implications, the reason this bill is so un-needed (and perhaps harmful) is that our society has created a list of false attributes that we apply to young people. Youth are considered to be foolhardy, irresponsible, ignorant, dependent and dangerously impressionable. Because we collectively believe this is true, we limit the rights and responsibilities of young people. In reality, comprehensive research suggests that the social restrictions we place on young people cause youth to display negative attributes -- not the other way around. Young people have the ability to make informed choices about their lives and their bodies, but only if our society empowers them to do so, and gives them the tools to make responsible and informed decisions in a supportive, non-judgmental way. In North America, we have shifted away from protecting youth from actual danger, and have drifted towards trying to protect them from their own choices. Lead paint on a child's toy poses a tangible, direct safety hazard. Sexual exploration -- regardless of what the age difference is between the people involved -- only poses a threat if social conditions make it that way. In a society where sexuality is considered a little "dirty", youth who are experimenting with sex are likely to do so in secret, regardless of how healthy it is. In a society which tells youth to respect their elders, *actual* adult sexual predators can get away with abuse because young people are slow to question the inherent authority which society bestows upon adults. Raising the age of consent will do nothing to fix these things. We can stop child sexual abuse, but only if we are committed to tearing down social norms which engender exploitation. Raising the AOC is a band-aid approach. This is not the way. P
Nick Dodds, Aurora Ontario
02/23/08 10:09 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Clear separation between Church and State
" The success of tyrants is determined through their ability to divest the greatest amount of people of their personal rights and freedoms with the least amount of protest." This bill would make Stephen Harper a tyrant if it is made law. I have always engaged in sexual relations with youth as young as 14 years old and have every intention of continuing to do so. This law will be challenged and thrown out of Canada as the violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that it is. Fear of human sexuality and expression is the worse type of sexual perversion. This is a direct method to terminate the separation between Church and State. They use terms that are flawed to describe single men and women who seek sexual recreational pleasure as "Predators", a fallacy as this is meant to dehumanize their target portion of the population. They rely on an atmosphere of fear, shame and lies for this to work. We - the target portion of the population- must respond with courage, pride and truth.
Viamund, Toronto Ontario
03/08/08 6:54 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
...
I live in Brazil, where the age of consent is also 14. At that age I used to believe I was old enough to decide what was good to me in sexual matters... that I could say 'yes' or 'no' reasonably, without being deceived or coerced to do things against my will. However, looking at my 14 y/o niece, I'm troubled by the thought that she is considered to be old enough to decide to relate with older men on her own; it is not unusual for girls to have relationships with men who are 10 or 15 years older over here. It all depends on one's personality traits. Immature youth will end up hurt or feeling exploited when they relate with older people, even if the relationship was 'consensual'. So I think that, yes, 14 is too early to decide on those matters.
Luiz, Recife PE
03/10/08 11:55 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Can be exploited by anyone of any age
Sex is sex, regardless of how much older the man/woman is. Why would it be any different? Why would it be more harmful? Do you think that 16 year old boys don't try their best to exploit 15 year old girls into sex using any means possible, including getting them drunk? To think that an only an older woman/man is "evil" or a "predator" and that only they are capable of inflicting harm on a consenting teenager is silly. This is just puritan, Christian moral values being shoved down our throats. Teenagers aren't children (they are adolescents) and should be educated about sex and provided with birth control and condoms to prevent disease. If you keep treating them like children, then what do you expect?
Meredith, Toronto Ontario
03/30/08 2:07 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.