I recall many times growing up when I felt like my inalienable fundamental human rights were violated in unjust autocratic ways, mostly at school. There was also the time of being a year older than my partner but the potential of ridiculous arbitrary laws having major consequences.

I feel like the age of 18 as some kind of moral benchmark is ridiculous. I feel like it is just tied to the age of conscription. Basing sexual morality on the age when the state can abduct and murder without recourse is nonsense. Most of us likely exist in a duality where we might cringe at “underage” of any kind, but not think twice when a couple of teens are dating and in a physical consensual relationship that is respectful and private.

So from a distant future culture’s perspective, like if Star Trek TNG existed in hard SciFi, and there is no need for our present arbitrary policy enforcement, what should be the basis of adolescent autonomous agency?

  1. Maybe it is weening, cultural pressures, and education.

  2. Maybe it is full independence and self sufficiency.

For the record, this is my favored idea as it pressures society to enable a balanced financial early life and opportunities. It also adjusts to account for real world maturity levels. IMO, it is either this or number 1 as these are derived from individual human life phases.

  1. Maybe you think it should be something else?
  • RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    9 months ago

    The purpose of hard age limits isn’t just to restrict the autonomy of minors.

    It’s also to allow adults to know where they stand, with respect to the law, and eliminate ambiguities that could be used for selective enforcement.

    As an adult, I can’t decide whether to sell alcohol to a minor, or have sex with a minor, etc. based on some concept of “real world maturity”. And if you give prosecutors flexibility in charging adults with crimes based on some mushy concept of maturity, you can probably guess who will get the shaft: poor folks, and black & brown & red folks.

    I don’t know that hard age limits are “fair” to minors, I suppose I would probably agree that they are not. But we have to consider what is fair to the person who might be accused of a crime.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      Of course they’re fair. That is the benefit of hard limits: their fairness. They are hard because they are simply defined, and that simple definition makes them fair because it means it applies equally to everyone.