Template:Debate Guide:Arguments about children and minors: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 07:47, 14 October 2021

People under the age of majority can be sexual...

Against: Cognitive ability = consent - Some argue that true informed consent to voluntary sexual activity is a "special case".
Against: Childhood innocence - Childhood innocence is not a state of asexuality that can be "stolen".
Evolutionary logic - Why CSA makes no sense in evolutionary terms.
Cyclical paternalism - Protecting children brings about the need to protect them more.

Sexually repressing children and minors does not benefit them...

Against: Online dangers - The internet is generally not a dangerous place for minors.
Sexual neglect - Neglect of a child's sexuality may be abusive.
Reverse sexualisation - Popular acknowledgement of sexuality in nude photography is revealing.
Liberty-empowerment - Empowering young people will benefit them.
Turn of events - How the reporting and prosecution of sex can change the perspective of a youth.

Child advocacy is often illogical...

Against: The kids do not want it - Legal minors must supposedly "embrace" or "consent to" law reforms.
Against: Teen brain - Teen brain speculating (inferiority) is value laden, pseudoscientific propaganda.
Against: Corresponding age attraction - Questions the assumption of a unique "childhood" sexual orientation.

From the encyclopedia...

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 *[[Debate Guide: Evolutionary logic|Evolutionary logic]] - Why CSA makes no sense in evolutionary terms.
 *[[Debate Guide: Cyclical paternalism|Cyclical paternalism]] - Protecting children brings about the need to protect them more.
-*[[Debate Guide: Prior experience|Prior experience]] - There is only one true way of gaining sexual experience.
 '''Sexually repressing children and minors does not benefit them...'''