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

“Anal” about Canada’s Age of Consent

In a previous blog it was mentioned that the age to consent to sexual activity is 16 years old with certain restrictions and exemptions. The sexual activity being referred to does not include anal sex. A quick read of the criminal code of Canada states: "Every person who engages in an act of anal intercourse is guilty of an indictable offence" unless the two consenting individuals are married or are over 18 years old. Upon reading this, I was outraged! Why would anal sex be placed in a higher age bracket?

Upon further investigation, I found that Ontario and Quebec had ruled this law unconstitutional in two court cases. I believe this to mean that anyone who engages in anal sex who is under 18 but over 14 (the age of consent at the time of the case, but now it would be 16) and taking into consideration the close in age exemptions would be the same as any other sexual activity.

This is good news.

But this is where I get "anal" (pun intended).

The Criminal Code of Canada still has this law written.

So...does this mean that anal sex is still illegal and punishable for those unmarried and under 18? The court cases in Ontario and Quebec happened in 1995 and 1998 respectively and it sounds like even though it was ruled unconstitutional this law still technically exists!

L.L.

The issue of Mental Capacity

In the spirit of taking on an anti-oppressive lens for this blog, as discussed earlier, we decided to examine many issues in which certain groups have been over looked in the policy. The first issue we will examine is mental capacity as it relates to the issue of consent. We chose to look at mental capacity in two forms; the issue of if a person is mentally challenged, and the issue of if the person is inebriated for some reason, for example through the means of alcohol or drugs.

The Criminal Code of Canada states that all people in a “position of trust or authority” or people in a “relationship of dependency” with a person with a mental or physical disability have a responsibility to that person. Therefore, if someone in one of these relationships in any way counsels or incites, for a sexual purpose, the person with the disability to touch his or her body without their consent, then they are guilty of an offence and could face up to five years imprisonment. The concern I have here, is that there is nothing else mentioned in regards to mental capacity relating to disabilities. For example, what if a mentally disabled female was physically 19 years old, but mentally was functioning at the age of 10. Does this girl have the ability to give consent to sex? One could argue that biologically she will feel the same hormones and urges that other 19 year olds have, however if she is only functioning at the age of 10, then she may not understand the repercussions from engaging in sexual activity. There is no guidance in how to proceed with this situation in this law, and that has the potential to be incredibly harmful for the complainant.

As well, there is very little mentioned in the law about the issues of inebriation. The Code states that a defendant cannot use the defence that he/she believed the complainant consented if the defendant was intoxicated. However nothing is mentioned of the complainant’s mental awareness. For example, if a girl was drugged and date raped, then the perpetrator would be guilty of drugging her and assaulting her; however if the girl was at a party and was drunk of her own volition, there is no mention of if she would be able to give consent. One could argue that she was temporarily intoxicated and therefore could not make an educated decision of whether or not to consent to sex. Although one could also argue that she knowingly got drunk and put herself in that position and therefore willingly gave up the ability to give consent. Note I am not supporting either argument, but both would be possible outcomes from this situation.

These issues of mental capacity definitely need more addressing in the criminal code because as is, there are a lot of loop holes where certain groups of people are being ignored and therefore could be incurring greater harm than they deserve. Also, while this issue is addressed in the Criminal Code of Canada, there is no mention of mental capacity in the actual policy dealing with age of consent (aside from the mention of a person in a relationship of dependency). Therefore, this issue needs to be addressed in a clearer method, not only in the criminal code, but also in the policy itself.

-P

Who Enforces Age of Consent Policy? Anyone?

One may question as to how the Age of Consent policy is enforced, and by whom – a difficult question to answer. It was Pierre Trudeau who famously stated to reporters that "there's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation", adding that "what's done in private between adults doesn't concern the Criminal Code". The key word here is that of ‘adults’, where mutual consent is present in their sexual activities. Children, and youth fall within the Age of Consent policy-law to ensure their protection and safety.

The Age of Consent policy is, what’s called a ‘regulatory policy’, which exists to deter certain behaviours, in this case, nonconsensual and/or exploitative sexual practices. Sexual activity is next to impossible to monitor, as you can imagine. We haven’t got cameras in our homes – it would violate our rights to privacy, (I wouldn’t want Big Brother watching me, would you!?). This policy acts to inform the public that youth of a certain age, and within certain limits, ARE legally able to consent to sexual activities... and some are not.

Those who do not meet the standards and exceptions to the age of consent policy are penalized within the judicial system.

Examples:

** male person who had sexual intercourse with a female not his wife who was over 14 but under 16, and "of previously chaste character," (I’m assuming that means she was a virgin?) was guilty of an indictable offence, and liable to a maximum of five years’ imprisonment, whether or not he believed she was 16.

** "sexual interference" or "invitation to sexual touching" is prohibited, in respect of a young person over 14 but under 18, where the accused is in a relationship of trust or authority towards the complainant or the complainant is in a relationship of dependency with the accused. Previous sexual experience and/or consent are no longer relevant where this special relationship exists. The maximum available penalty is five years’ imprisonment for those prosecuted by way of indictment.”

Law enforcement in and of itself does not protect youth; how could it unless we are monitoring the sexual relationships between all individuals? It only allows for prosecution once youth have already been exploited. There are a number of offences that the accused can be charged of, including: Sexual Interference, Invitation to sexual touching, Sexual exploitation, Bestiality in presence of or by child, Indecent acts, or is charged with an offence under Sexual assault, Sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party, or causing bodily harm, or Aggravated sexual assault in respect of a complainant under the age of fourteen years [now 16 years].

Seeing as it has taken me 22 years to learn the age of consent (16), I don't think the federal government of Canada has done a good job in educating the youth. How can the policy act as a deterrent if few know about it? It only provides guidelines as to how someone will get punished. So much for protecting youth!

- A

Reasons for change to current policy

The changes to the age of consent policy (under Bill C-2) were implemented in May, 2008. These changes were brought in as part of the Conservative Party’s attempt to crunch down on violent crimes. The change in the age of consent going from 14 years of age to 16 years of age is the first time the age has been changed since 1892.

The reasoning behind this change is the government’s attempt to incorporate harsher penalties and more convictions for sexual predators, and to reduce the occurrence of the exploitation of Canada’s youth population. Unfortunately, this change in law focuses primarily on criminalizing sexual behaviour rather than focussing on protection of children. However the debate to change this age has apparently been in discussions for the past 15 years and was never implemented. Now that Canada’s age of consent is 16 years of age, it is the same as many other countries, such as Britain, Australia, and most of the United States.

One of the other reasons stated for the change in age was to address the issue of internet predators. This brings about a change in section 172.1 of the criminal code, in which people are prosecuted for attempting to lure children over the computer for sexual purposes. Due to the change in age, now anyone under the age of 16 is considered a child, and therefore anyone attempting to attract them over the internet can be convicted of a criminal offense.

-P

A Brief History

Age of consent laws have been in place for a long time in Canadian history, below is a quick timeline of the law and the major changes.

• Before 1890 only girls under the age of 12 were NOT able to consent to sexual intercourse

• But in 1886 a law was put into place where seduction of a girl between the ages of 12-16 of "previously chaste character" was an offense. This included the promise of marriage. In 1887, the age was increased to 21 when the promise of marriage was made.

• 1892 – Accused could not plead ignorance on belief of age

• 1920 – The previous law made in 1886 was changed to prohibit sexual intercourse, and after 1920, the question of who was more to "blame" became an issue that could lead to acquittal but the offence remained in force until 1988.

• 1969 – Anal sex is added as an offence for unmarried couples under the age of 18. Before this anal sex was considered an offence no matter what age and special consideration was placed on homosexuality as an illegal activity

• 1988 – Bill C-15 added new offences: sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching and sexual exploitation. These were added in response to protect both boys and girls under 14. Sexual exploitation was added so adults in a position of trust or authority cannot have any sexual contact with a young person under the age of 18
  

It should be noted that few charges were actually laid in response to this law prior to Bill C-15 due to the language used in the law - specifically only defining sexual activity as sexual intercourse and the protection only of women of "previously chaste character" which was easily contested by the defendant. Not much has changed since Bill C-15, although a major change has occurred in the past year...

L.L.

Description of Canadian Policies Related to Sexual Consent

To start off our discussion of policies related to consensual sex, I will provide a brief definition of consent followed by descriptions of current relevant Canadian policies.

According to Canadian legislation, consent to sexual activity is defined as “the voluntary agreement of the complainant to engage in the sexual activity in question”. Under law, consent is not obtained where:

• the agreement is expressed by the words or conduct of a person other than the complainant
• the complainant is incapable of consenting to the activity
• the accused induces the complainant to engage in the activity by abusing a position of trust, power or authority
• the complainant expresses, by words or conduct, a lack of agreement to engage in the activity, or
• the complainant, having consented to engage in sexual activity, expresses, by words or conduct, a lack of agreement to continue to engage in the activity

On May 1, 2008, the age of consent in Canada was raised from 14 to 16 years of age as part of the Tackling Violent Crime Act.

The act of touching any person under the age of 16 years for a sexual purpose is considered a crime under Section 151 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Section 153 extends to prohibit the sexual touching of a person under 18 by a person in three circumstances: if he or she is in a "position of trust or authority" towards the youth, if the youth is in a "relationship of dependency" with him or her, or if the relationship is "exploitative".

For those under the age of 16, two factors determine where consent to sexual activity can be obtained lawfully between two individuals: age and form of sexual activity.

For example, an individual at 12 or 13 years of age can consent to sexual activity with an individual no more than 2 years older than them. A youth of 14 or 15 years of age can consent to sexual activity with an individual no more than 5 years older, or to whom they are married. Neither of these exceptions applies under any of the 3 circumstances described in Section 153 of the Criminal Code.

Curiously, Section 159 of the criminal code sets the age of consent for anal intercourse at 18, with the only exception being if the two partners are married. This means that no unmarried persons under the age of 18 can legally consent to anal intercourse. I should also note that the section refers to anal intercourse between “husband and wife”, and therefore is not inclusive of individuals in same-sex marriages. Furthermore, the provinces of Ontario (1995) and Quebec (1998) have determined this section of the criminal code to be unconstitutional.

- L. T.

Issue: Pregnancy and STIs

One of the primary issues when considering consensual sex in young people these days is the issue of sexual consequences. Some of these consequences are those of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) and unplanned pregnancies. Before getting into the issue of age of consent, I thought it was appropriate to examine how these ramifications are changing in the Canadian teenage demographic.

According to an article in the United States by Walcott, Meyers and Landau in 2008, the younger an adolescent is when they start engaging in sex, the greater their of risk of contracting an STI. Presumably this is due to the fact that the younger a person starts having sex, the more sexual partners they will have, therefore increasing their risk of getting an STI or HIV. This risk is increased by the fact that in the US, adolescents who participate in sexual activity before the age of 14 have the lowest levels of contraceptive usage.

However, when examining the Canadian statistics from an article in the Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality from 2004, we see that sex at an early age is not necessarily a recipe for disaster. According to research, adolescents in 2002 were less likely to face the negative sexual health outcomes than teens from previous generations faced. Younger adolescents (grade nine) were more likely to use a condom than the older teens (grade 11), who were more likely to use oral contraceptives, primarily the birth control pill. While the pill does help protect people against the risk of pregnancy, it does nothing to protect against the risk of STIs.

The pill is also being said to be the primary reason that unplanned pregnancies have been declining in Canada. According to the 2004 article, the teenage pregnancy rate has been going down, while the abortion rate has stayed the same. Basically this means that while there are fewer teen pregnancies, abortion is being chosen as the solution more frequently.

After examining these two issues, it is reassuring to see that for the most part young people are starting to take responsibility for their actions and trying to be proactive in preventing unplanned pregnancies and protection against STIs. Education on these issues in schools, as well as at home, seems to be making an impact on these adolescents and they are making safe decisions. While there is still a long way to go in the eradication of STIs and decline in unplanned pregnancies, adolescents today seem to be well on their way, and equipped with the knowledge needed to achieve this goal.

P.

Issue: Sexual Abuse and Exploitation

Laws that govern sexual activity such as age of consent are put into place to combat against one of the worst crimes that could be perpetrated against another human being. Before looking at the laws and policies surrounding age of consent, a short discussion of Child Sexual Abuse and Exploitation will be given to put into context the reasons age of consent is so important and why the age has been recently increased.

Sexual abuse and exploitation is a serious issue that needs intervention. Too many children are put into situations where they are abused or exploited (one is too many!). A study conducted in 1997 reported that the prevalence of Child Sexual Abuse is 16.8% of women and 7.9% for men. There are even some studies that say the numbers could actually be higher due to the hidden nature of this type of abuse. Another study conducted in Canada found 54% of girls and 31% of boys under the age of 21 had experienced sexual abuse! So why the difference in numbers? One reason is how the study defines sexual abuse and exploitation the latter study used a relatively broad definition, so what is sexual abuse and exploitation? Below are common and relatively agreed upon definitions.

Sexual abuse essentially occurs when a child is used for sexual purposes. In Canadian Law charges that can be given to someone who has abused a child below 16 years old include sexual assault, sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching. Consent MUST be given for any sexual activity to occur and the law recognizes that children under the age of consent cannot agree to sexual activity.

Sexual exploitation is another form of child sexual abuse. Child sexual exploitation is the use of child under the age of 18 for a sexual purpose in exchange for some benefit such as money or drugs. Internet luring, and other activities related to the safety of children is also considered exploitation.

Risk for sexual abuse and exploitation of children increases with age, children aged 12 or older make up a third (35.9%) of all reported cases. Does this sound surprising to you? There are so many issues such as prostitution and internet luring being reported. Do you think there is an increase in these activities and will the increase in age of consent help to combat these atrocious crimes?

L.L.

Theoretical Lens

As four educated young women, we feel it is appropriate to approach the topic of consensual sex using theories that view all humans as sexual beings and emphasize empowerment and freedom of sexual expression, as well as deconstruct discriminatory aspects of policies and systems that maintain unfair power imbalances of the status quo over marginalized groups in society. Thus, we will be examining issues of consensual sex and relevant policies through empowerment approaches including a feminist approach to issues of consensual sex in general, and anti-oppression lens when looking at how these polices impact specific marginalized groups in society.

Empowerment theories focus on the idea that society is made up of "stratified groups" who possess relatively unequal levels of power and control over resources. Empowerment is a process whereby “individuals and groups gain power, access to resources, and control over their own lives.” These theories also contend that "empowerment requires linking a sense of self-efficacy with critical consciousness and effective action". Critical consciousness, or consciousness raising, is “the process of increasing awareness of how political structures affect individual and group experience and contribute to personal or group powerlessness.”

A central tenet of feminist theory is that it is "necessary to critique one’s social context and deconstruct its discriminatory aspects". Feminist theory stresses the importance of identifying marginalizing "attitudes, expectations, language, behaviours, and social arrangements" that have contributed to the oppression of certain groups of people. Unity and diversity within community life is embraced, and the existence of multiple experienced realities is recognized, not simply the reality of those in power. Feminist thought observes that “the macro-social structures of economy, polity, and ideology interact with the intimate, private micro-processes of human reproduction, domesticity, sexuality, and subjectivity to sustain a multi-faceted system of domination.”Abolishing patriarchy and encouraging sexual freedom are primary goals of feminist thought, which requires women to establish a consciousness based on strength and self-worth.

Anti-oppression theory offers another very useful lens through which to examine and critique the impact of age of consent issues and policies, particularly for marginalized groups. Anti-oppression theory asserts that we are born with many aspects that make up who we are as people, and that these factors, which are mostly beyond our control, determine how we are viewed in society and how we view others. Essentially, we are socialized to judge people based on ideas about what we have learned to be “right”. Anti-oppression theory breaks these factors down into six main oppressive forces in society: racism, sexism, heterosexism, ableism, agism, and class oppression. Actions and beliefs of dominant and powerful members of society are challenged through the empowerment of oppressed individuals and groups. Anti-oppression theory contends that equality is brought about through the eradication of these six "societally-imposed barriers".

Feminist and anti-oppression theories share the major theme of empowerment, along with related processes of the recognition of multiple experienced realities, strength building, critical consciousness raising, acquired control over one’s life, and the breakdown of discriminatory social systems. Using these major themes and processes in the examination of issues of consensual sex greatly aids in illuminating discriminatory aspects of age of consent policies as it pertains to marginalized groups in society. Through these lenses we believe it is both desirable and possible to create inclusive social policies that allow freedom and provide protection that extends to all members of society.

- L.T.