My Thoughts, at the End!

Hey everyone,

Thanks so much for reading our blog.  We've really tried to do our research and present the topic of Age of Consent in an anti-oppressive way, that was also fun and entertaining.

I really enjoyed posting entries, and having some fun with them!! I hope you enjoyed them too.

This project was a tough one, and I'm glad I got the chance to be a part of it.

Thanks for the great comments - they've really been stimulating and have really made me think.  I know my peers feel the same way.

Thanks for contributing to my education!! ;)

All the best,

- A

Sex Ed-YOU-cation (Con no. 2)

Sex Education courses have been contested since first introduced into the education system.  Some individuals promote and encourage sexual education, while others have attempted to hinder it.  These two schools of thought have brought about Comprehensive Sexual Education, and Abstinence-only Education.   

Comprehensive sex ed encourages a holistic approach to sexual education, including: building healthy relationships, learning about sexual abuse, LGBTQ issues, abstinence, and being aware of varying birth control methods such as oral contraceptives, condoms, and the morning after pill.  Comprehensive Sex Ed encourages individuals to become knowledgeable about their sexuality and the choices they can make to protect themselves.

Abstinence-only education promotes abstinence (obviously!) and has often relied on inaccurate information that does not aid in the healthy sexual development of youth. Abstinence-only education is based on a belief that abstinence is A MUST until marriage in order to avoid the perils of STIs and 'psychological difficulties' related to sex.

Although it is true that abstinence is the only 100% way to protect against STIs, pregnancy, and HIV, it i has a success rate of 76%.  If 100 students were to say they were abstinent, only 76 would stay abstinent - so we should be educating all students on safe sex!  Also, MANY studies show that teaching youth about sex DOES NOT mean that they will leave the classroom sex-crazed and ready to hump the closest thing that moves.  It is merely education.  Youth will make up their own mind about whether they have sex or not, their sex education will help them make a safe choice.

I encourage you to watch the following 3 minute clip re: Comprehensive vs. Abstinence-only Sexual Education. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTGEOrZ3MCs

With two extremely controversial methods of providing sexual education, it is no wonder that the Age of Consent policy is so difficult to enforce.  It will be difficult to promote the policy, if people still believe that if youth are educated about sex that they will run off and have a lot of it.  The Age of Consent policy would act as a measure for a better understanding of the legal rights of youth.

If 40 million dollars a year is spent promoting Abstinence-only education (Bush administration in the USA), how are youth to become knowledgeable about their rights, liberties, and means of protecting themselves from exploitative individuals? 

When sex education becomes more about safety and responsibility, than fear of sex, we will be able to promote the Age of Consent policy in a light of protection.

- A

Pro – Clarity

An obvious pro, one that we have stressed throughout this blog, is that our recommendations would clarify the policy. With clarifications it is hoped that the law will reach more people, especially youth. With more people aware, better protection can be provided to those that may be vulnerable to predators. Further than having protection, young people would be better armed if they are aware of the law and can take measures to protect themselves.

The clarifications to definitions, especially in regards to the meaning of "sex" are also a pro of our recommendations. Making this clearer will help people to better understand what kind of sexual activity is "allowable" at what age and with whom.

It is our hope through our recommendations that the policy would be better understood by those that are most affected by it.

L.L.

A con of the new policy...

I feel that our recommendations for a new age of consent policy bring many improvements to the current policy, especially in terms of its degree of inclusivity. At the same time however, calling our policy "inclusive" raises some important questions.

First, as discussed in previous posts, we feel that we are walking a fine line between providing necessary protection to individuals who are vulnerable to sexual exploitation while at the same time recognizing and respecting an individual's right to make their own decisions to participate in desired and consensual sexual activity. Thus, I ask, is our policy truly inclusive in the sense that individuals in legitimate relationships who happen to fall outside of the stipulations of the policy (i.e. age) cannot lawfully give consent to participate in sexual activity with each other?

A second inclusivity related issue continued in the new policy involves problems associated with setting one (arguably arbitrary) age of consent, which fails to recognize individual differences in terms of timing of developmental milestones and thus "readiness" to engage in sexual activity. I believe that in our striving for inclusivity, the new policy still does not provide flexibility for existing individual differences in physical, psychological, and emotional development during adolescence.


Inclusivity then, to me, seems to be an elusive target or goal, one that needs to be continually worked towards and yet may never be completely attainable in an absolute sense. Though I believe that our recommendations for changes to the policy are a step in the right direction, I feel as though there are more exceptions to the rules we set (and in some cases impose on others) than can properly be accounted for in most social policies, particularly those rooted in cultural norms and socially constructed ideas of what is "right".


- L.T.

One of the Pros of the new policy...

With this new policy in mind, we realize that there will be some pros and cons, as with most policies. However our attempt is to minimize the cons and ensure the pros. One of the biggest positives that our new policy would have is the fact that it would be more inclusive to everyone. As previously discussed in this blog, inclusivity is a huge issue with the current policy. As a result, we have discussed better ways in which to address the issue in the new policy.

By having a more inclusive policy, the policy will be more specific and clear about who all of the rules and regulations apply to in the general public. Therefore, hopefully, court proceedings on related issues will be more clearly defined.

As well, there is the hope that most minority groups will feel that the policy applies to them. For example, people who are involved in more taboo forms of sex (excluding what is classified as illegal), will be able to feel that the policy can apply to them, without being segregated or punished for engaging in a form of sex that is not considered appropriate by the government.

P.

Monitor what now?

Now that we understand the goals and objectives we believe would benefit the current Age of Consent policy, how would we monitor and evaluate the goals that we hope to implement? 

Assuming that as of now (figuratively speaking of course) that the Age of Consent policy is more inclusive, is more easily understood by the general public, and is more easily accessible to teens, how do we know if these recommendations have made an impact?

Since the Age of Consent policy refers to a very intimate and private act between two (or more!) individuals, it would be hard to monitor the direct impact it has on consenting adolescents. 
There are a number of ways we could gather information in order to better understand if the education and awareness has had an impact on individual sexual choices and actions. 

One way that we could get sensitive information could be through anonymous qualitative and quantative research asking teens whether their knowledge (or lack thereof) of the Age of Consent laws have impacted their sexual decision making in any way implementation of this could be tricky, depending on how it could be distributed but this could provide valuable information in future improvements to the policy.

We could monitor and evaluate inclusion by asking people to participate in writing the Age of Consent policy itself. We would hope to ask groups of people who have historically been excluded from this process, to participate in order to help develop an overall anti-oppressive policy. We would encourage a community approach to writing the policy, and this would include making the language accessible to the general public. If the language is understood, the policy itself becomes accessible to greater society.

When attempting to monitor and evaluate the awareness and education efforts set forth by the policy, we could send out questionnaires or surveys to adolescents within the education system seeking confidential responses as to when first contact with the policy occurred, how often, or if it had never occurred. We could request feedback from adolescents in sex ed classes whether or not discussion surrounding the Age of Consent is sufficient and/or whether or not the Age of Consent is even discussed at all.

- A and L.L.

Implementation of Policy at the Level of Government

Apart from individuals and groups and organizations, policies may be implemented at a governmental level. There are multiple avenues available through various levels of government staff and officials in which a new policy may be implemented. The beginnings of a new policy and its implementation may begin anywhere from MPs (local representatives), to public servants, to Ministers and their staff.

Members of Parliament (MPs) represent one of 301 constituencies in Canada, and allow members of their constituency to have somewhat of an indirect role in policy proposals, developments, and implementation when voting in the House of Commons. The downside of course is that MPs receive overwhelming amounts of diverse views from their constituents, and also each political party tends to vote uniformly on policy issues, leaving constituents feeling as if their views were not heard.

Another means of implementing policy at the governmental level is through Public Servants. The Canadian Public Service is "the staff or bureaucracy of the federal government". The public service has a responsibility to support Ministers by providing "loyal, professional, and non-partisan support to the government of the day". The Public Service "functions through departments, agencies, commissions, crow corporations, and other federal organizations". Public servants enact the “will of the government” through providing advice, implementing the priorities of the government, and delivering services that support Canadians.

Therefore, Ministers may be contacted directly or indirectly about inputs on policies. Ministers are "collectively and individually responsible to the House of Commons for the policies, programs, and activities of the government". Ministers look at issues from many points of view, and a letter or email is a good way for members of the public to contact Ministers. Ministers expect to hear from people in their electorate, from their departmental chief executives, policy advisors, lobby groups, media, coalition partners, and sections of the public of interest to them. Ministers are also "the cabinet’s eyes and ears about trends in the community". Ministers prepare policy briefs, and communicate with their staff, who will be analyzing the brief and advising the Minister.

Thus, in order to obtain a diverse opinions and incorporate views from members of the public and government, the implementation of policy at the level of government is a responsibility of countless individuals in general public and governmental positions with unique responsibilities at many different levels. Whether or not a new development or new policy is implemented altogether depends upon the direction and views of the current government, its staff and officials, and members of the public who have a special interest in the issue.

- L.T.

What can agencies do?

As far as implementation of our new policy is concerned, we now turn to examining what local groups and agencies can do to help bring about a new policy.

One avenue that could be used is the media:
· News stories on the current issues with the age of consent policy.
· Television and newspaper advertisements about suggested changes to the policy with contact information provided.
· Internet webpages with discussion forums, blogs, and contact information on groups that support the implementation of a new policy.
All of these are methods in which the media could be used to get the attention of the general public, and get them interested in the subject.

Other areas that could be used by an agency are methods of public relations. For example, having pamphlets made with the key arguments for a new policy and information about how to join the agency that supports the new policy. A suggestion box may also be helpful to let the organization know what is working and what is not working as far as implementing the policy is concerned.

All of these are methods in which organizations or agencies can help with implementing new policies, or even new programs to support or educate the public about new policy, or changes to the policy.

P.

What can YOU do?

In order to implement these changes in policy, we must acknowledge the varying groups that have impact on the policy’s full emersion into the community.

Individuals for example, (aka you and I), have a responsibility to take part in the discussion and implementation of the Age of Consent policy, in order that we do our part in promoting safe and responsible sex for the youth of our community.  We have a responsibility to be knowledgeable and educated individuals so that we can recognize situations where power or authority may be a concern with young adolescents.  We must also be knowledgeable so that we give adolescents the opportunity to decide for themselves what sexual activities they pursue.  When we are educated, our youth are educated, and as a community, we can encourage all people to act responsibly.

As individuals we have the opportunity to support the awareness campaign for the Age of Consent in a number of ways.  One method is to blog about the issue.  When blogging, we have the opportunity to network between varying groups and/or organizations who have the power/authority to educate about the policy.   Also when blogging, we are able to reach other individual bloggers, thereby raising awareness to other individuals by means of cyberspace.

We could also share our knowledge with local schools or the school board, community groups, religious groups, recreational leagues and the like.  As individuals, we have incredible power to educate and raise awareness simply by word-of-mouth. 

If we took the time to become educated ourselves, we can have incredible influence in gathering like-minded people to bring about awareness and change.

- A 

Recommendation – Awareness Campaign

One recommendation that we as a group would like to see implemented is something geared towards young people and the general public that would provide awareness of the age of consent laws. An awareness campaign could be geared towards not only youth but also parents.

A potential way to guarantee awareness to youth could be through sexual education classes in schools if they do not do so already. Having a chance for youth to have an open dialogue about potential risks for breaking laws and further than that to include information about sexual exploitation could aid in reducing the number of instances of harm that could occur through acts such as internet luring, for example.

One thing to keep in mind is that there may be some schools that might not teach sexual education or would not want to discuss age of consent to young people for a variety of reasons. Other methods of awareness must be implemented. If this issue could be attached to another similar issue such as personal safety, healthy relationships etc., then the awareness of age of consent laws could be further communicated.

Other ways that the age of consent laws could be communicated could be through the media in which youth access such as television, internet etc. Getting youth involved in this would also have a greater impact. One example could be a competition in which youth would submit an advertisement addressing age of consent and issues. This could be in partnership with various agencies that address healthy sexuality for youth and a medium which would get the advertisements viewed.

Another way to provide awareness could be a campaign geared towards parents that would address ways parents can talk to their children about this issue along with sex in general. This could also be advertised in avenues such as television, radio and written materials.

These are just a couple of ideas that could get the word out on age of consent laws in Canada. This method would also help to make the laws more accessible and understandable which is one of our main goals.

L.L.

Sex...sexual activity...sexual touching...what does it all mean??

To continue with our recommendations for a new age of consent policy, we suggest that the policy and related laws may be improved by clarifying the definition of sex.

As previously discussed, ‘sex’, or ‘sexual activity’ and ‘sexual touching’ as referred to in the Criminal Code of Canada, may indicate any number of acts, from a kiss, to petting, to oral sex, to any form of sexual intercourse. Because age of consent polices and related laws use such broad terms that encompass all acts that are sexual in nature, and the incidence of sexual intercourse is no longer required to prosecute individuals who violate these policies or laws, vulnerable individuals are provided with comprehensive protection against all unlawful “sexual” acts and activities.

At the same time however, such an unclear and unspecific definition of what exactly constitutes “sexual activity” or “sexual touching” makes it extremely difficult to discern or know what sexual acts are considered acceptable. This lack of clarity has important implications especially for those partners who happen to fall outside of age restrictions set out by age of consent polices and related laws. For example, a 13-year old may not legally consent to engage in any sexual activity with individuals more than 2 years older. Therefore, a 13-year old who happens to be in a romantic relationship with someone who is 2 and a half or 3 years older technically cannot legally consent to engage in sexual activity with this individual. So what, then, constitutes “sexual activity” or “sexual touching”? If these two partners were to share a kiss would the older partner be prosecuted, or would this be considered acceptable? If these two partners were to engage in other forms of “sexual touching” that did not involve oral sex or sexual intercourse (e.g. petting, etc.), would this be considered lawful? Where exactly do we draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable “sexual activity” or “sexual touching” between consenting partners who may happen to fall outside of age restrictions under the age of consent policy?

A new age of consent policy and related laws would benefit from providing a clearer more specific definition of what exactly constitutes “sexual activity” and “sexual touching”, and importantly what acts that are labelled “sexual” in nature are considered legitimate expressions of romantic feelings between those who happen to have a partner that falls slightly outside of age restrictions under age of consent polices and related laws. Only through such clarification can individuals be expected to know and understand which “sexual” acts they may engage in lawfully with their partner. Perhaps such cases should be considered on an individual basis, as different meanings and levels of legitimacy may apply to the same sexual acts or activities across couples.

- L.T.

Some anal changes...

As for our recommendations of changes that should occur in the policy, we would like to once again visit the issue of anal sex. As previously examined in our blog, anal sex is in no way more detrimental to a person than vaginal sex. If one were to argue that someone was forced into a submissive role in anal sex the same argument could be made about the missionary position, as well as many other sexual positions.

For this reason, we recommend that if a new policy were to be created, the age of consent for anal sex should be changed to match the age of consent for other, perhaps more conservative, forms of sexual activity. If this change was made to the policy, there may be less of a stigma surrounding anal sex, and perhaps even contribute to breaking down barriers in society for the LGBTQ community. While the policy does not specifically say anything about the community, anal sex has become the stereotypical form of sex for gay men to participate in (despite the fact that heterosexual couples engage in this form of sex on a regular basis as well). If the age was reduced, then, optimistically, society may go farther in the acceptance of gay men and possibly the LGBTQ community as a whole.

If one of the other concerns regarding anal sex centred on the issue of treating the more submissive partner in a disrespectful manner, the issue of consent is still present. If the submissive partner feels disrespected in this act, he or she could always say stop and not allow the act to continue. If the partner fails to respect that person’s wishes, then he or she is guilty of rape no matter what the age of the people involved.

Through our anti-oppressive lens we have examined the issue of anal sex and come to the conclusion that, without question, anal sex should have the same age of consent as all other standard forms of sexual activity.

P.

Did you know!?

One of the goals we hope to achieve with the new policy is making it more accessible to teens.  We believe that in order to protect our youth in the community from sexual exploitation from people seeking to take advantage of them, they themselves must be aware of the policy.  This awareness is essential so that teens understand what consent means and what their rights are to be able to consent to sexual activity, and to refuse it. This awareness would also promote knowledge of sexual exploitation, issues of power and authority, and questions surrounding their right to consent or not.   This will also contribute to the norms and values of the community. 

The following website http://sexualityandu.ca/teens/what-8.aspx has a section for teens called “Sex and the Law”, where laws, and other policies, including the Age of Consent are raised.  This is a phenomenal idea, as it provides an easy resource for teens that are unsure of their rights and responsibilities surrounding sexual activity.

In order to make this policy more accessible to teens, we propose that it be introduced early in sexual education classes in elementary school. The earlier youth are introduced to their rights to consent or not to consent will better protect them from persons of authority or power that may try to convince them otherwise.  We also feel that if the Age of Consent policy is introduced early on, youth will be much better able to decide for themselves when it is appropriate to engage sexual activity.

We also propose advertisements by means of television and radio in order to promote awareness about the recent increase in age of consent from 14 to 16.  When the general community is aware, everyone can act to protect youth from sexual exploitation.   We also feel that including youth in the education and awareness process is essential, so forums, focus groups, clubs, societies, etc. could be formed within or outside of schools to promote healthy sexual education.

We hope that with an accessible policy, youth will be able to think twice about their sexual decisions, to ensure that they protect their peers and themselves. 

- A

Goals and Objectives - Understandable Language

To start off, I want to post an official section of the Criminal Code of Canada that refers to the Age of Consent:

Consent no defence

"150.1 (1) Subject to subsections (2) to (2.2), when an accused is charged with an offence under section 151 or 152 or subsection 153(1), 160(3) or 173(2) or is charged with an offence under section 271, 272 or 273 in respect of a complainant under the age of 16 years, it is not a defence that the complainant consented to the activity that forms the subject-matter of the charge."

I cannot speak for anyone other than myself, but seeing as how I don't really want to continue reading the document due to its language of legal terminology, I highly doubt many fourteen year olds actually take the time to leisurely read the age of consent laws. I do recall as a 14 year old myself in the past, I was not too keen on reading any laws and if I did, I probably would not understand it!

Hence one of our goals in implementing an alternate policy is to change the policy's formatting and (scary!) language. The original language is difficult to read and understand for the general public the policy would be better received if it were easily understood for all individuals, allowing the message to be clear and accessible for those affected.

Although this may be an idealistic goal and may be impossible to implement without a complete overhaul of all the Canadian legal documents, our objective would be to create an alternative document, one that is written for all to understand, especially for those young people to whom this law affects.

L.L.

First Goal for a New Age of Consent Policy - Inclusivity

We feel that a major goal in developing a new age of consent policy should be to work towards achieving a greater degree of inclusivity. Our definition of inclusivity in terms of the formation of a new policy is to include those who have historically been oppressed or excluded altogether from policy stipulations. Historically and with the current policy, individuals have been provided with differential protection and marginalized groups are still currently limited in terms of certain sexual freedoms due to discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, age, and more.

Ideally, building greater inclusivity through a new age of consent policy would mean that necessary protections are provided to children and young people, while at the same time establishing recognition for the rights of all individuals to make decisions about their own sexuality, and extending freedom to for all to engage in consensual sexual activity regardless of the gender of one’s partner or the specific form of sexual activity in which they choose to engage.

Thus, a more inclusive policy would provide the necessary level of protection for populations vulnerable to sexual exploitation, while simultaneously promoting fairness and equality for historically marginalized groups who have been (and are still presently) discriminated against under the age of consent policy and related laws.

- L.T.

Changing up the Policy: Goals and Objectives

In order to better understand the recommendations we will introduce to the existing policy, we need to explore the goals and objectives that we feel are important to developing a stronger policy.

We have identified three goals for the adjustment of the existing policy. The first being inclusivity. We define inclusivity as including all individuals in the policy whom have historically been oppressed. An example being, including sexual activity pertaining to age and anal sex. We hope that by developing a more inclusive policy, we will eliminate the oppression within the existing framework and encourage all members of society to become educated, aware, and more responsible for the protection of all youth under the Age of Consent policy.

Our second goal includes the change of the policy’s formatting and (scary!) language. The original language is difficult to read and understand for the general public. We feel that the policy would be better received if it were easily understood for all individuals, allowing the message to be clear and accessible for those affected.

Our final goal for the policy is to ensure that it is accessible to teens, as they are the primary group that is affected by the change in policy. We hope that by ensuring this policy is accessible to teens, by means of education, awareness campaigns, and the like, we are promoting the protection and safety of youth, and enforcing the repercussions for the policy's violation.

These three changes to the policy will aid in awareness of the policy and how as a community, we are committed to ensuring that we are looking out for the welfare of all citizens.

Our overarching ambition is to effectively protect vulnerable youth from sexual exploitation and predators, while at the same time promoting the rights of all individual's to make their own decisions about and give consent to desired sexual activity. Thus, while still acknowledging the need to protect children from harmful sexual activity and exploitation, we feel that it is also extremely important to maintain positive views and attitudes towards healthy sex between consenting partners, and to caution ourselves in viewing sexual activity or exploration as primarily something to be fearful of.

- A, LT, LL, P

In summary, and moving forward...

On our blog we have examined the change in the age of consent policy as well as the policy itself, now we would like to take this opportunity to summarize our main points about the policy.

As with any policy, we understand that nothing is perfect and there are always ways that people can get around the law and there are plenty of grey areas. So to reiterate some of our concerns with the policy...
• The policy is not inclusive of all types of people (LGBTQ community, people with mental disabilities, people who partake in anal sex, etc.)
• The policy does not recognize the challenges teens face, and the issues of dating someone older or in a position of authority
• There is a lack of definition available to completely understand what “sex” is in terms of the policy
• There is a challenge in enforcing the policy
• There is a lack of knowledge by teens about the policy and what they “can” and “cannot” do at their age

However, there are also some positives that exist around the current policy, and we don’t want to overlook them...
• The policy provides a deterrent to possible offenders, as well, without the policy, sex crimes against our youth would go unacknowledged in the courts
• The policy provides parents with a feeling of safety that if something happens to their child they can take legal action against the perpetrator
• The policy demonstrates that sex crimes are acknowledged in society and in the government, even if not accurately enforced

While there are substantial issues with the policy, not all of them can be addressed in a policy, however for the next few entries, we would like to explore some alternative suggestions to the policy and establish some goals and pros and cons of these suggestions. We welcome any comments or suggestions of our readers as well.

P.

Age of Consent Policy and Impact on Services and Organizations

The change in Canada’s age of consent policy from 14 (where it remained for over 100 years) to 16 years of age in May of 2008 was the cause of great controversy, and has received support and criticism from different human services and other organizations.

The government of Canada believed increasing the age of consent would provide greater protection for children, and police believed the bill would provide them with “more tools” in the battle against internet predators. Other groups that supported the increase in the age of consent were the National Council of Women of Canada (NCWC), the Canada Family Action Coalition (CFAC), Canadian Crime Victim Foundation (CCVF), and Canadians Addressing Sexual Exploitation (CASE).

The change in the age of consent has also received criticism from various organizations, including the pro-choice Canadian Federation of Sexual Health (formerly Planned Parenthood), The Canadian AIDS Society, the AIDS Committee of Toronto, Egale Canada, and the Child Welfare League of Canada.

The Canadian Federation of Sexual Health believes that the legislation will do nothing to keep youth from harm, and instead actually infringes upon the rights of youth in terms of their ability to make decisions about their own sexuality.

The Canadian AIDS Society has stated that “increasing the age of consent could result in young people being more secretive about their sexual practices and not seeking out the information they need. This will place youth at an increased risk of contracting HIV and other sexually transmitted infections”. The AIDS Committee of Toronto also has concerns about how raising the age of consent will make it more difficult for HIV/AIDS information and support to reach already marginalized youth (e.g. gay, lesbian, transgendered). The Committee is further concerned that a raise in the age of consent may "interfere with young people’s access to appropriate and ethical healthcare services" (birth control, HIV and STI testing and treatment, condoms, abortion services), as well as possible affects to sexual health education in schools in terms of decreased availability of HIV/AIDS prevention information to young people, and "increased public pressure to reduce or eliminate sexual health and AIDS prevention education in schools".

Similarly, Egale Canada, a national organization that advances equality and justice for LGBTQ individuals and their families, also opposes the increase in the age of consent. Egale believes that "the criminal code already protects 14 and 15-year olds from exploitative sexual activity and internet predators", and also believes that "the prospect of legal sanction and third party disclosure could discourage young people from accessing preventative and therapeutic health services and other forms of information and assistance".

Finally, the Child Welfare League of Canada criticizes the bill’s effect of "removing judicial discretion in cases involving 14 and 15 year olds". They believe that the age of consent is an "arbitrary cutoff", and "reduces the flexibility to apply the law in a much more specific and individualized way", or on a case-by-case basis.

Clearly there are many differing yet valid concerns from various services and organizations in regard to the change in Canada’s age of consent policy. I believe that these concerns and the impact of the recent increase in the age of consent are crucial to evaluate so we may come to know its effects on young people’s sexual behaviour and their accessing of sexual health and information services.

- L.T.

Age of Consent Policy and Impact on Gender

Canada’s age of consent policies and related laws under the Criminal Code of Canada have undergone numerous changes and revisions over the years. I think the obvious progression in our ways of thinking about sex in relation to gender over the years are fascinating, and our striving for greater equality, inclusivity, and fairness are quite evident in changes made to age of consent policies and related laws over the past century. Thus, I thought it might be interesting not only to consider the impacts of current age of consent policies, but also to help put current policies into context by taking a look back at the impact of laws which at the time did not use gender neutral language, and blatantly imposed differing expectations and consequences for the performance of unlawful sexual acts depending on one’s gender.

The 1988 amendments to the Criminal Code included “sexual interference” and “sexual touching” that prohibit adults from engaging in any sexual activity with boys or girls below the age of consent (now 16). The seduction of a girl over 14 but below 16 who was previously of “chaste character” remained an offence until 1920. After 1920, the question of who was more to “blame” also became a deciding factor as to whether or not an individual was prosecuted.

A number of documents and publications prior to the 1988 amendments cited numerous reasons for the need for changes in consent policy and related laws, and the most often cited reason was the perceived unequal treatment of boys and girls, because earlier offences only considered females as victims. Even more, offences of unlawful sexual intercourse provided no protection for young women in terms of sexual contact short of intercourse. A further serious limitation was the law’s lack of protection for girls between the ages of 14 and 16 who were not “of chaste character” or who were found more to “blame”. Thus, the impact of these policies had the potential to be quite negative, and not only imposed differential treatment for girls and boys by viewing only girls as victims, but also that individuals who engaged in non-consensual sexual activity with a young person short of intercourse could not be punished under law.

Clearly Canada’s current age of consent policy and related laws cover a much more broadened range of sexual activity and include gender neutral language so as to not impose differential treatment based on gender (again with the exception for anal sex).

Although these laws provide much needed protection for young people and are much more inclusive, fair, and promote equality to a much greater extent than laws of the previous century, the idea of imposing a uniform age of consent across genders and individuals is still somewhat problematic in a developmental sense. Males and females develop physically and psychologically along similar developmental paths, but can reach certain cognitive and physical milestone at significantly different points. Also, because there is a wide range in age where certain milestones are reached and still considered as “normative” development, individuals across and within genders may be physically and psychologically ready to engage in sexual activity at different times than one another, and either before or after the age of consent as set by Canadian policy and law.

- L.T.

Are They All Offenders?

In light of the recent raise in the age of consent, I want to now look at how this impacts offenders and those who could potentially become offenders. The age of consent was raised in response to growing concerns of youth being exploited for sexual purposes.

Since protection from sexual exploitation is already covered in the law, the increase to 16 would definitely help in the instances of internet luring for the purpose of sex where there is no exploitation in the sense of prostitution and pornography. This would deter adults who would want to prey on the younger “vulnerable” population.

Some organizations, such as Egale “a national organization that advances equality and justice for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans-identified people and their families across Canada” (http://www.egale.ca/ ) opposed the increase in age of consent due to concerns that it would increase the criminalization of non-harmful sexual activity. This means that some teenagers could be charged with a sexual offence alongside pedophiles. While the close in age exemptions do protect against this in some instances, there are still issues where a person could be charged and no harm existed, or if the accused is just over the age where it is legal to engage in sexual activity.

For a person under 14 years, the older person must not be older than 2 years, and for a youth under the age of 16 but over 14, there must be an age difference of no less than 5 years. If a couple in question are 13 and 16, then the 16 year old can be charged with an offence. How different would it be from a 13 to 15 year old, not taking into consideration individual differences?

Another argument proposed by Egale is that increasing the age of consent will actually make it easier for offenders to take advantage of those younger than 16. Making sexual acts illegal will deter younger individuals to disclose sexual activity thereby isolating younger people and making them targets for offenders.

The balance of giving young people the freedom of sexual expression and protection from offenders is tricky.

Does this law actually help to prevent harm or can it cause more harm?

Is this law, which presumably errs on the side of caution, really protecting youth more than before the change? Or is it causing more harm by labelling some teenagers as sexual offenders when they just didn't think of the consequences?

It isn’t as simple as it seems.

L.L.

Impact of the policy on teenage relationships

Another area of society that is impacted by this policy is the area of relationships. As discussed earlier, this policy has an impact on relationships that involve one member being in a position of authority, and an impact on the LGBTQ community, but there is also an impact that is felt throughout the teenage community and the relationships in which they engage.

The question could be asked, what if a teenage couple was more than five years apart in age; presumably this would be a reasonable situation. So, for example, let us examine a couple who have been dating for a year and now one of them is 14 and the other is 19 (potentially a high school freshman and a senior) and they are trying to decide whether or not they want to engage in sexual intercourse. If they choose not to have sex, then there are no legal ramifications, however, if they choose to have sex there could be some serious consequences. Let’s say the 14 year old is a female named Betty, and the 19 year old is a male named Bruce. After having sex, Betty’s father finds out what has happened, and since he does not like Bruce very much, he decides to report him to the police. Since Bruce is 5 ¼ years older than Betty, he is outside of the close in age allowance that the policy states is a safe range to engage in sexual intercourse (5 years). Therefore Bruce is arrested, and if the jury finds him guilty, he could be seen as a sexual offender or child molester for the rest of life. These are huge ramifications that Bruce could endure purely from having consensual sex with his girlfriend.

Now let’s examine if Betty and Bruce had decided to wait on having sex. There is potential that everything will be okay and they can hold off until they are both of age. However there is also the possibility that social circumstances will get in the way; I do not need to tell everyone how teenagers can be these days, there is a lot of peer pressure to have sex, and the presentation in the media is that everyone is having sex and that it is okay. Being a teenager is hard enough to deal with, and when you add your friends telling you to have sex, and then feeling like you want to yourself because your hormones are acting up and you are in love with your partner, it can be really challenging to resist the urge. This can result in a huge amount of stress and feeling pressured which can be detrimental to some youth and put a huge strain on their relationships.

Therefore there is no obvious answer that Betty and Bruce have; both decisions could have a negative impact and lasting consequences. Hence the very existence of this policy, while good for protecting people from harm, can be very detrimental to the relationships of our teenagers.

P.

Perceptions Shape Enforcement

It was discussed in an earlier blog that the enforcement of age of consent laws is very difficult and is essentially there as a deterrent. So how does this policy impact enforcement? Well in order for one to get charged for an offence under age of consent laws, there has to be a complaint.

Take this example:

A 14 year old is caught having sexual relations with a 21 year old. The 14 year old is caught by either

1. The parent
   
2. A friend of the 14 year old of the same age
   
3. A friend of the older person
   

Who would be most likely to go to the police with this information of illegal activity?

Most, if not all people would say the parent would be the most likely to file a complaint. There are multiple reasons that either friend would not disclose to authorities, for example, being unknowledgeable about the laws, the perceptions either friend has in relation to sexual "conquests," fear of getting the friend in trouble etc. A main reason that a parent would want to file charges would be to protect their child, most parents (ideally) would have the best interests of their child in mind. An author who conducted a study on perceptions of sex below the age of consent stated this issue very well:

"For the law to be enforced effectively, it is necessary to know the public's perception of the relationship that the law is trying to control. If there is not a good degree of consensus between the law and public opinion, people will not report illegal relationships as crimes and may not be willing to give evidence in court." - Below the Age of Consent: Influences on Moral and Legal Judgments of Adult–Adolescent Sexual Relationships

Many people would not want to file charges especially if they do not see the act as being wrong, so perceptions plays a huge role in the enforcement of this law. The law is meant to protect from harm, but if there is a lack of reporting we must take this into consideration if we want to truly protect those who need it.

L.L.

Sex? What's That?

If you've been following this blog thus far, I hope that you have started to question the definition of sex.  Our last post questioned penetration and what that means to varying couples.  This post is to challenge your definition of "sex" and what it means to you.

The most common response to "What is Sex?" is Intercourse (vagina and penis - obviously difficult if you're a gay or lesbian couple that may not have one of each).

But sex can and does have varying meanings to many people. This excerpt from http://www.aolhealth.com may help clarify what I mean. 

"Vaginal intercourse is often given the lofty position as the ultimate sexual event, but clearly the story doesn't end there. Pleasurable activities — from casual intimacies such as kissing and caressing to more intense types of physical contact designed to produce orgasm — can complement intercourse or stand alone as a means for gratification. The penis and vagina are not the only tools for sexual enjoyment; people can give and receive intense pleasure without any direct genital-to-genital contact. The mouth, breasts, anal area, hands, and other sensitive spots on the skin are significant sources of erotic sensation. Even the friction of bodies rubbing together, clothed or unclothed, can bring sexual pleasure. Sexual activity does not always demand that you have a partner, either. Masturbation, viewing sexually stimulating materials, and creating fantasies all may be avenues for sexual gratification."

Sex can have varying meanings, whether in heterosexual relationships, homosexual relationships, bisexual relationships, transgender relationships, or anything in between. 

The Age of Consent policy states that, "The age of consent refers to the age at which the criminal law recognizes the legal capacity of a young person to consent to sexual activity."

Now, try defining "Sexual Activity":

Sexual intercourse. Penetration. Penis in vagina. Anal sex. Oral sex.  Fellatio. Cunnilingus. Giving head. Going down. Masturbation. Double clicking the mouse. Stroking the one-eyed snake.  Lesbian sex. Gay sex. Kissing. French kissing. Petting. Fingering. Sex toys. And there are more! Are these all the same? What constitutes ‘sex’ and 'sexual activity' and what doesn’t?  Is it all subjective (personal)?    

Sex is not and should not be confined to a few selected practices, as it limits individual meaning to sexually gratifying experiences.  

 

- A 

Where are we Penetrating?

Penetration.  Do I dare raise the issue as to where this penetration occurs and if it REALLY matters between two consenting partners?  And what about lesbian sex where there may not be penetration? 

If sexual intercourse by means of vaginal penetration or the vagina engulfing the penis, is allowed at 16 between consenting adults, not withstanding the exceptions to the rule, including exploitation, then what extra harm does anal penetration risk to youth?  Or lesbian sexual experience with no penetration?  L.T. examined the Age of Consent policy as it oppressed the LGBTQ community, and I’m wondering about the impact of this oppression.

Assume you are a youth of 16.  You’re in a happy, healthy, relationship with your partner.  After careful thought, you decide to have sex.  If you have sexual intercourse (vagina & penis), you’re okay, although one of you (presumably the one with the vagina) may get pregnant.  And both of you may get an STI or HIV. A lesbian couple also risks STIs and HIV if toys are not properly cleaned, or one partner is infected - although it is more difficult to transmit HIV.   The Age of Consent policy doesn't speak to risks within a lesbian sexual relationship - it's not mentioned.  Does this ommitance de-legitimize their sexual relationship?  Perhaps it is assumed that only with penetration does the act of sex truly occur ??? A male gay couple is not even legally allowed to HAVE penetrative sex. Why?  I couldn’t tell you - the policy doesn’t explain it.   Admittedly there are risks, such as the tearing of the rectum that can cause serious damage – but is pregnancy or an STI such as herpes any worse? Is anal sex any more psychologically damaging than finding out you’re another teen pregnancy, or that you must live with an STI for the rest of your life?

I don’t get it.  The age of consent for anal intercourse, unless it is an act engaged in, in private, between husband and wife, is 18. 

I wonder what the impact would be on two young individuals who learn that they are unable to express themselves this way sexually because of a law that doesn’t quite make sense.  AND it doesn't speak to lesbian sex.  If the policy is going to discriminate against anal penetration between gay individuals, perhaps it should also discriminate against lesbian sex with toys!!  The policy could read: The age of consent for sex toys, unless it is an act engaged in, in private, between husband and wife, is 18.  That doesn't make any sense either. The policy shouldn't discriminate against anyone!! Penetration is penetration.

 I would feel confused, frustrated, annoyed, and discriminated against.  How come John and Jane can have penetrative intercourse at 16, but John and John can’t?  Are the risks greater than one another? What about Jane and Jane who use toys for penetration and also share risks?

Is the policy not oppressing LGBTQ youth and their sexual expression, while allowing heterosexual youth to have sex as they please?  I think so.

- A

Impact of Policy to Other Laws

As we start to examine the impact of the change, and this policy in general, to other areas of society through our anti-oppressive lens, we cannot help but look at the impact to other areas of the law. The impact of this policy change did not only effect the age of consent for sexual activity, it affected all of the areas in the Criminal Code that surround sexual activity. For example, the age of consent to observe bestiality (bestiality is always illegal, but forcing a person under 16 to observe bestiality is a crime all on its own), indecent acts, and exposure (again, exposure is always illegal, but this refers to exposure to a person under 16 as a separate crime) all used to rest at the age of 14, but have now been raised to the age of 16 due to the change in policy. Another change related to this policy is that if a person is convicted of any of these related charges (mentioned above), and later applies for a volunteer or permanent position to work with children, his or her history will be disclosed to the employer or volunteer supervisor.

While this change in policy seems to have changed and incorporated many areas of the law around sexual activity, we wondered through our anti-oppressive lens, if there were any laws that had been left out during this change. So I examined the government’s child protection act where they define what it means to fall under the category of “child”. By the government’s definition, a child is any person that is under the age of 16, or between the ages of 16 and 18 if one is mentally or physically incapacitated in a manner that means one is unable to take care of him or herself.

However, this definition of a “child” was created in 2006, and therefore existed before the change to the age of consent in 2008. Therefore, I am faced with a curiosity; was a “child” always considered someone under the age of 16 and therefore always two years above the age of consent, or was this age changed in the anticipation that the age of consent would change? If the first option is the case, then presumably if the age of consent was raised by two years, then should not the age of a child also be raised by two years to remain consistent? Or if the latter is true, then why was the government allowing people at the age of 14, who were still defined as “children”, to have sex?

These questions make me wonder further if there have been any other laws or definitions of “children” that have been left out and not changed despite the age of consent changing. If this is the case, then there is only a limited time until a loophole in the laws are found and there is the chance for a dangerous child offender to run free which could have a very damaging impact on the children in our society.

P.

Age of Consent Policy and Issues raised for LGBTQ individuals

To continue our discussion of questionable aspects of Canada’s age of consent policy, I will be discussing the policy in terms of exclusionary language and stipulations in regard to individuals who identify as LGBTQ.

For the most part, Canada’s age of consent policy is written with gender neutral language, so as to include both heterosexual and same-sex couples. However, as touched upon in a recent post, for some reason the policy upholds conditions under which consent to engage in anal sex drastically differ from those required to obtain consent for other forms of sex (e.g. sexual touching, oral sex, vaginal intercourse).

The section states that consent for anal sex may be obtained only by individuals 18 and older, unless the act is performed between a “husband and wife”. Even though same-sex couples gained the legal right to marry in Canada in 2005, this blatantly exclusionary language has yet to be changed to gender neutral or same-sex couple inclusive terms.

Are we supposed to ignore the terms “husband” and “wife” and interpret this language as pertaining to all married couples? If we interpret the policy as it is written, then does it not mean that two married individuals under the age of 18 who happen to be of the same-sex may not engage in anal sex before their 18th birthdays? Yet heterosexual married couples under the age of 18 may have all the anal sex they please?? Furthermore, how does the policy apply to a young couple (married or otherwise) in which one or both of the individuals are transgendered or transsexual?

Clearly many issues are raised in the use of this extremely outdated language, and the arguably discriminatory age limit for anal sex versus all other forms of sex mentioned in the policy. Obviously this discrepant age requirement for anal sex requires a second look, and the policy begs to be updated with gender neutral and inclusive language. Such changes are necessary steps towards ensuring inclusivity, equality, fairness, and clarity in policy conditions required to obtain consent for all individuals, no matter what they or their partner happen to have between their legs.

- L. T.

Legitimate illegitimate relationships

If the law surrounding anal sex can still technically exist, perhaps there are other oppressive faults within this policy as well? I raise the issue of legitimate illegitimate relationships.

In exploring the Age of Consent policy, I have begun questioning the people that have been left out by it. The policy does not speak to individuals who exist in a relationship where one person may have ‘power’ or ‘authority’ over another other than it is exploitative. What happens when there are legitimate relationships between two individuals, even though there IS a power differential? Example: A professor and a teaching assistant where both are 18+ and are engaging in a happy, and healthy adult relationship. What policy protects the rights of these two consenting individuals? When they leave the classroom, are they not two adults making 'adult' decisions?

A recent news article from The Record (Kitchener/Waterloo Newspaper, October 22^nd, 2008 www.therecord.com) shared a story about a former Grand River Hospital social worker who “coerced” an 18 year old client into a sexual relationship.

Excerpt from The Record:

“Bergen (former social worker) and the woman didn't have sex together until after she had been released from the Kitchener hospital for the last time and he was no longer working there. She also agreed to the relationship and was 18, the legal age of consent in most situations involving older adults in positions of trust. That meant the case turned on the specific nature of the relationship and whether Bergen's trust, power and authority as her therapist carried over to the sexual affair.”

Now, some of you may be saying, “What!? That’s so wrong!!” or “He used his power over his client to seduce and use her!”

Is it possible to even have a legitimate relationship of this kind? The policy assumes that individuals in power differential relationships should be examined suspiciously, but does not provide any room to support an adult relationship between two consenting individuals.

It feels like a serious gray area to me. What do you think?

- A