shipping-isnt-morality:

Speaking of call me by your name discourse:

“Just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s moral!”

Well, okay, yes, but what does mean it’s moral, then? Are we going to rigidly enforce the “your age divided by 2 plus 7” rule? Are we going to just use 18 as the age when it all becomes ok, despite the fact that a majority of the world does not and has never used that age, and there’s no moral or physiological reasoning behind it? Are we going to go by brain development and say nobody under 23 with anybody over 25, even if that is a broad generalization with plenty of people being almost entirely matured before age 20 and many others not ceasing development until nearly 30?

Is it just based on what you find uncomfortable? What gives you the right to decide that for hundreds of millions of teens the world over?

“It’s based on what everyone thinks is wrong” mmmmno, then we’re back to legality, and also that social acceptance of an idea means it isn’t morally wrong. you can probably think of a few examples of that going poorly.

“It’s coercive!” Okay, now we are definitely getting somewhere. Underage relationships and relationships between older adults and teens are wrong because they’re vulnerable to coercion, and because age may mean that they cannot give informed consent. But it’s the coercion and the lack of consent that’s wrong, not the age per se.

And so now we have an actual criteria that isn’t legality (or any other arbitrary numbers) to judge a relationship off of: is it coercive?

And now we have to ask questions like:

• Do both parties fully understand what they are consenting to, including the possible physical and emotional consequences?
• Is anybody being pressured by internal or external pressures – a need for attention they can’t get otherwise, social acceptance, or a need for the relationship to be secret?
• Is one party in a position of direct authority over the other, and the subordinate might feel that refusing would have negative consequences, regardless of whether that has been actually threatened?
• In fact, is one party in a position where they could have any sort of fear that saying no would have negative consequences? Does either party feel that they could not walk away without the other inflicting any sort of consequence?

If one of these things is there, then yes, we need to look extremely hard at whether the relationship is really consensual.

But if someone is above the age of legal consent, informed, and not being in any way coerced – on what basis can you say it’s morally wrong?

Or is this just about what makes you uncomfortable, and not about consent or coercion at all?

This. This is important.