Talk:Age of consent in Europe/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Central Asia

What is the reason for the inclusion of certain Central Asian nations? 185.26.63.45 (talk) 11:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

These countries have part of their territory in Europe, so they are included. 2A02:2F01:58FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:6BC2 (talk) 19:37, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

What's that nonsense? Ever seen a map? — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:30, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Have you actually seen a map? See also Transcontinental country. And the countries you removed (except Kazakhstan) are also part of the Council of Europe. Plese seek WP:CON before removing large parts of the article that were well established here. See also List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_in_Europe#Sovereign_states. 2A02:2F01:58FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:5F15 (talk) 06:12, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

What part of Armenia, Azerbaijan or Kyrgyzstan is in Europe? When was the last time you saw a map? See, membership in an international body doesn't move a country between continents, unless you are prepared to argue that as a member of Eurovision, Australia is a "European country".

All these countries I removed have long been included in Ages of consent in Asia and need no duplication here. — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:13, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Moreover no - neither Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan or Armenia have any part of their territory in Europe, and the UN classifies them (along with Azerbaijan, Georgia and Kazakhstan) as Asian countries. — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:32, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Kyrgyzstan was not listed here, I don't know why you bring it up. You removed the following countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Turkey. The lede states clearly "The below is a list of all jurisdictions in Europe as listed in List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe". The countries you removed are commonly accepted, according to numerous official classifications, as being European countries. The fact that they are also considered as being Asian countries does not mean they should not be listed here. And there is nothing wrong with a country being included in both Ages of consent in Europe and Ages of consent in Asia articles. The article List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe states: "Based on such a commonly used division of the continents, the transcontinental states of Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Turkey have territory in both Europe and Asia." With Armenia, you may have more of an argument, but it being a member of several European organizations makes it officially accepted as "European". Just like few will argue that Cyprus is not "European". Here we go with the sources, not with what we think is "right". Based on those sources, the article List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe has been created, and this article shows the same list of countries present there. And membership in an international body does matter, as it has many implications (such as being subject to the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights). 2A02:2F01:52FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:6357 (talk) 17:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

You even didn't bother checking what you are restoring before hitting revert. For your kind information, I removed[1] the following entries from the table: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkey, and Uzbekistan, along with, where existed, their respective paragraphs in the subsequent section. Now you are bringing Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan to Europe, lol. However, please keep in mind that we normally go by the UN classification of countries, mind you, and consequently, as you might have guessed, we don't list France among Central American states (despite French Guyana), Spain among African countries (despite Ceuta and Melilla), or place the beautiful country of Denmark on the North American continent (despite Greenland). Consult this source if in doubt: [2]. — kashmīrī ^TALK 23:02, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

OK, I didn't realize that Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan were in the table, obviously they shouldn't be here! But with regard to the others, the lede reads "The below is a list of all jurisdictions in Europe as listed in List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe" and I believe that's what we must include here, for reasons stated above; and because these countries have been for a long time in this article, so it seems to be the WP:CONS to include them. 2A02:2F01:53FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:4D3B (talk) 00:03, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

France

I believe edit 15:17, 10 February 2021 should stand. The undo asserts:

this has already been discussed (see the archives on talk). we use the term "age of consent", even if legally it is not called rape, but a distinct criminal offense."

Yet, this is inconsistent with Wikipedia's definition of Age of consent:

The age of consent is the age at which a person is considered to be legally competent to consent to sexual acts.

All people are considered legally competent to consent in France, there is no set age for consent: I believe the edit should stand. If it shouldn't, the above definition needs to change.

(As an aside, archiving discussion of France from this page seems like an attempt to hide dialogue. Surely that dialogue should be restored.)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.3.3.106 (talk) 09:58, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Following are some selected examples of how this topic was covered, along with my commentary. It isn't pretty.

According to The Guardian:

In France, a child under 15 is considered a sexual minor but they can still be considered able to give their consent.

It seems that many newspapers reported that France did not have an age of consent. I did not see any reports that various states in the U.S. also do not have an age of consent, even though most states have laws which appear to be comparable to the law in France, i.e. one statute for rape and a separate statute for sex with an underage person, in which sex with an underage person is unlawful, but if there is coercion, then that is a separate crime which will have higher penalties. So while underage minors can give consent, it is quite serious with or without consent, and the penalties reflect different degrees of severity.

A number of newspapers nevertheless reported that France had no age of consent. Perhaps these papers should lose a few points on their "reliable source" score, I don't know. However, there are some sources out there that made more specific claims, such as that having sex with a child under a specified age is not automatically considered illegal. (Curiously, none of the sources I came across mentioned the issue of whether the law involves strict liability, i.e. whether or not it is a defense that the perpetrator believed the person was of legal age, which is actually a question of some contention, though it seems to rarely be addressed.)

This is from The Local:

... The age of consent in France is 15, but prosecutors still need to prove the sex was non-consensual to obtain a rape conviction. ... The prosecutor was seeking an eight-year prison term on the rape charge, while the punishment for underage sex in France's criminal code is fixed at five years and a 75,000-euro fine.

Here is how the Associated Press described it:

... in recent weeks, French courts have refused to prosecute men for rape after they had sex with 11-year-old girls because authorities couldn’t prove coercion.

There is no mention whether there were other charges If not, wouldn't that have been the fault of prosecutors?

Here's how the Argus Leader carried it:

Adults can be charged with groping and sentenced to a maximum of five years in prison if they’re found guilty of abusing a child under 15. The more serious charge of aggravated sexual assault or rape of a child carries a sentence of up to 20 years — but coercion or violence must be proven.

The BBC sensationalized the story:

Under the existing legislation, if there is no violence or coercion proved, offenders may only be charged with sexual abuse of a minor and not rape. ... Sentences are the same for sexual assaults of minors and non-minors, but rape convictions carry much harsher punishments.

The fact is, in the U.S., our law on underage sex has generally evolved, from one based on the "legal fiction" that underage persons could not truly give consent, to one that recognized sex with a minor as a crime distinct from rape. By abandoning the "legal fiction" approach, we can craft the penalties that we see fit as being appropriate for each distinct crime. All the stuff about France not having an age of consent is just flapdoodle. Unfortunately, the majority of news organizations picked up this story (from the "wire services") and ran with it. Even at the national level (like NPR), it seems too much to ask them to bring some editorial control into the picture when they get a news story that presents cockamamie facts. Fabrickator (talk) 01:03, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Until relatively recently, consent was not part of the laws on rape or other sexual offenses. Indeed, traditionally, rape and other sexual crimes were defined by force, intimidation, inability of the victim to defend herself etc. The introduction of lack of consent (rather than coercion) in sexual crime legislation is a modern change, and it is not by any means universal (France for example defines rape as sex imposed by "violence, constraint, threat or surprise", not as sex without consent). Another modern change that has happened to sexual crimes laws (in many US states and in many other countries) is the abolishing of the crime of "rape", and its replacement with several degrees of sexual assault, or other sex crimes no longer called "rape", with such sex crimes having different penalties, based on their particular circumstances. When it comes to sex with minors, it is often the case that there are different crimes, depending on the age of the minor, on whether violence was used or on other circumstances. In the UK, under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, sex with a child under 13 is the crime of "Rape of a child under 13", whereas sex with a child aged 13-16 is the crime of "Sexual activity with a child". But the age of consent is listed as 16, and not 13, and rightfully so: it is irrelevant what the crime is called, or what approach the law takes to consent - as long as the act is illegal; and that's why it is correct to list the age of consent in France as 15. 2A02:2F01:53FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:4B43 (talk) 12:54, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

You seem to be conflating the concept of consent as an element of the crime of rape with the concept of explicit consent being required to establish consent. My impression is that explicit consent (i.e. making a statement, immediately prior to commencing the sex act that you are agreeable to sex) is not something you will find specified in criminal statutes, but something that may be codified in student regulations or for rules applicable to some similar social environment.

By contrast, statutes often specify scenarios which strongly suggest the lack of consent in fact (meaning that the person was not actually agreeable to sex), such as the use of force, the presence of a weapon, the status of the relationship between individuals (e.g. a prison guard and a prisoner). By having such statutory provisions, the need to prove the absence of consent beyond a reasonable doubt is eliminated. It is primarily in the context of sexual contact with an underage person where consent is not relevant to the determination of whether a crime was committed. Fabrickator (talk) 00:05, 2 April 2021 (UTC) (update from 11 March 2021)

Table states 18 while it is obviously 16 for most.

Why does summary table has 18 in last column, when it is clear that it is 16 for most countries. One picture reflects that, the other - does not. Why this is happening? I have a strong temptation to change the table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helgin (talk • contribs) 20:15, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

The table is very confusing. It has the "Limited by age", "Limited by relationship" and "Unlimited" columns, which can be difficult to follow (it is true, however, that if you take all restrictions into account, the age is 18). I'm removing the table, because it really doesn't add anything to the article, as each country has its detailed section.2A02:2F01:5DFF:FFFF:0:0:6465:6802 (talk) 12:42, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Romania, repeated vandalism

The age of consent in Romania is 16. It was 15, but it was changed to 16 in 2020.

The criminal code now reads:[3]

Articolul 220

Actul sexual cu un minor (1) Raportul sexual, actul sexual oral sau anal, precum și orice alte acte de penetrare vaginală sau anală comise cu un minor cu vârsta între 14 și 16 ani se pedepsesc cu închisoarea de la unu la 5 ani.

Translation: "Sexual intercourse, oral or anal intercourse, as well as any other acts of vaginal or anal penetration committed with a minor aged between 14 and 16 shall be punished by imprisonment from one year to five years."

Here is the Law no. 217 of 29 October 2020, that was published in Monitorul Oficial on 30 October 2020, which modified the Criminal Code:[4]

An ip is constantly vandalizing the section, writing that the age of consent is 15. It is not, it used to be, but now it is 16! (the ip is citing outdated sources, and also non legal, non reliable sources).

If this continues, the article may need to be protected.2A02:2F01:53FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:7829 (talk) 15:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

The page has now been protected, but with the wrong version. Can somebody help and modify the section to state that the age of consent is 16, per sources provided above? 2A02:2F01:53FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:7829 (talk) 08:41, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

No, it is clear that your opponents think otherwise, and I am not going to be involved in this content dispute.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

My opponents? User:LizardJr8 actually supported my edits. If you protected the article, I think it would be a good idea to be "involved", at least a little bit.2A02:2F01:53FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:7829 (talk) 09:00, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

My involvement was to revert edits that removed sourced information and replaced it with unsourced information without an edit summary. Repeatedly. I am not an expert in Romanian law, but I do expect that assertions are sourced. So whatever the actual correct content is, I do not know. Just make sure it is cited. LizardJr8 (talk) 18:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Additional, FWIW: the edits that made it 15 were the unsupported ones. It doesn't look to me like 15 is correct but I can't make complete sense of the Romanian laws in Romanian, even with the help of Google translate. LizardJr8 (talk) 18:11, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what I am saying: that the age is 16, not 15. I am worried that the ip that was reverting and refusing to participate in the discussion on the talk page will continue to do so after the article is unprotected. That's why I think there should be consensus until then. 2A02:2F01:52FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:7C7B (talk) 18:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Also the age difference between partners must not exeed 3 years, not 4, as the ip wrote:[5]

Articolul 220

Actul sexual cu un minor (6) Faptele prevăzute la alin. (1) și (2), precum și la alin. (4) lit. e) nu se sancționează dacă diferența de vârstă nu depășește 3 ani.

Translation: (6) The acts described in par. (1) and (2), as well as in par. (4) letter e) shall not be punished if the age difference does not exceed 3 years. 2A02:2F01:52FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:7C7B (talk) 18:39, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of removing the RFC tag, as it is wholly improper. There is no RfC statement which is neutrally worded, short and simple. You have not provided any options for us to choose from, nor a clear question you want us to discuss. You seem not to have followed WP:RFCBEFORE.

This is apparently a simple content dispute. Oddly, it appears to be between 2A02:2F01:52FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:7C7B and 2A02:2F01:52FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:7C7B. Probably WP:BRD is enough here. Good luck. — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 22:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

It is indeed a simple content dispute, but it cannot be solved if the editor refuses to discuss and reverts repeatedly. WP:BRD is not enough here, when someone reverts without explanation, and refuses to seek consensus. I'm not sure what can be done about Special:Contributions/212.129.77.128 who does not want to cooperate?2A02:2F01:52FF:FFFF:0:0:6465:48AC (talk) 00:35, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

The age of consent in Romania is 16

The age of consent in Romania is 16. Here is what the last US Country Report on Human Rights Practices for Romania says: [6]

Section "Children", subsection "Sexual Exploitation of Children" reads: Sexual intercourse with a minor who is 14 to 16 years of age is punishable by a one- to five-year prison sentence.

There are also Romanian sources cited in the section, including the Criminal Code. 2A02:2F0F:B0FF:FFFF:0:0:6463:D1DD (talk) 06:13, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Mention of illicit sex under Vatican City

As of the 20:08 3 October 2021 revision, it is pointed out that sex between unmarried persons is illicit. However, there is no mention of any criminal liability if a minor is not involved. The only pertinent aspect of this would involve a marriage where one or both parties to a marriage are minors, but since Vatican City adheres to the general principle that sex between married parties is not subject to prohibitions on underage sex, this isn't relevant. It seems to me that unless the law provides for prosecution of sex between unmarried adults, this statement should be deleted. Comments? Fabrickator (talk) 23:59, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

terminology for age of consent articles

@Guarapiranga: A recent "archive" from this talk page made me wonder whether or not we have general agreement about certain aspects of the "age of consent" series of articles. Before I get into that, I want to point out that the talk page of every article in this series includes (or at least it's supposed to include) an invocation of the Age of consent pages discussion header.

My specific concern regards the phrase "unfettered age of consent". In Talk:Ages of consent in Europe/Archive 2#Unfettered age of consent, some editors (you know who you are) claim that

"unfettered age of consent" is to be interpreted literally

While other editors take the position that

"unfettered age of consent" is to be interpreted in a relative sense

.Avoiding the phrase "unfettered age of consent" is not an option, because the "discussion header" specifies circumstances when the "unfettered age of consent" is implied.

My perspective on this is to treat "unfettered age of consent" as a relative term. It always has been a relative term, and treating it as an absolute term would render it useless. I don't want to re-discuss this if it isn't necessary, but if you disagree, please speak up and I shall make the case. OTOH, if there has been a previous discussion where all interested editors achieved unanimity on accepting the "relative" interpretation, please let me know and I shall offer my apology. Fabrickator (talk) 03:55, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

What do you mean by relative and absolute in this instance? It's not clear. In the interest of this discussion, I'll just reiterate what I said 2 years ago:

Age of consent laws basically have exceptions and exemptions—exceptions typically made for relations of trust/authority, and exemptions for close-in-age relations. So what unfettered really ought to mean is un-fettered. For instance, The unfettered age of consent in Brazil truly is 14; no teacher can be convicted of statutory rape by having sexual relations with a 14-year old (and the close-in-age exemption goes as low as 12). The stated age of consent in Argentina is 13, on the surface looking even more liberal than Brazil, but if you look closely at the law, it's clear the unfettered age of consent is actually 18.^[1]

This being the case, the stated consent age means little, as it's variedly interpreted from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and what can be materially differentiated is:

1. the minimum age people are deemed capable of sexual consent with restrictions on the age difference between partners;
2. the minimum age people are deemed capable of sexual consent with restrictions on differences of trust or authority between partners; and
3. the minimum age people are deemed capable of sexual consent without such restrictions.

— Guarapiranga ☎ 04:58, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

When I refer to a "relative" unfettered age of consent, as compared to an "absolute" unfettered age of consent, I mean that it's "relatively unfettered" as opposed to being "absolutely unfettered". So for instance, if it's unlawful to have sex with someone under the age of 16, but if that person is your student, then it's unlawful to have sex with them if they're under 18. At the same time, if you're less than 2 years older (and they aren't your student), you can have sex with them as long as they're at least 14. (I'll point out, that if you're 17 years and 3 months old, then the age of consent as it applies to persons with whom you may legally have sex, is 15 years and 3 months.)

In this case, an "absolute" unfettered age of consent is 18. By "relatively" unfettered age of consent, I mean that the age of consent is "relatively unfettered", i.e. the situations where the age of consent is higher are the "exception rather than the rule". So for most situations, the age of consent is 16. It's higher in some cases and/or it's lower in some other cases. Provided those exceptional cases don't apply to your situation, then this "relatively unfettered" age of consent is what applies. But if those exceptional cases do apply, then you have to consider how that affects the legality of the contemplated sexual relationship.

This is seemingly pretty clear from the "age of consent header", e.g.

The unfettered age of consent should be in bold text, in order that it stand out. No other ages should be in bold text. Any exceptions to should then be discussed afterwards ("close in age exceptions, same sex relations etc)

.In other words, "close in age" and "same sex relations" were exceptions to the unfettered age of consent. (For example, same sex relations might have required one's partner to be age 18 rather than age 16. Now "unfettered" may be a more appropriate term when the exceptions only result in a lower age at which sex is legal, but those tended to be the more common exceptions and/or the exceptions of greatest interest. BTW, there is also some relevant discussion about the "unfettered age of consent" at Talk:Age of consent/Archive 2 § Interpretation:

the concensus so far has been to focus on the unfettered age of consent and then mention as a side note in each jurisdiction their specific variations for close in age exceptions, homosexual relations, prohibitions on anal sex and so on as they exist.

Fabrickator (talk) 09:22, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

I found this very extended discussion of this issue from 2007 at Talk:Ages of consent in South America § "Unfettered" age of consent. I'm mostly mentioning this here for the sake of completeness, but one of the issues I did find interesting to consider was the effect of laws that allow for sex subject to parental consent below a certain age. For instance, the age of consent might be 13 with parental consent or 18 otherwise. Fabrickator (talk) 19:08, 18 October 2021 (UTC)