Gay consent issue ‘crucial’ to the Home Department
Thursday 5th March 2009, 2:29PM GMT.
LOWERING the age of gay consent to bring it in line with that for heterosexuals is a matter of crucial importance, according to the Home Department.
It was responding to former deputy Peter Roffey’s (pictured) criticism in Tuesday’s Guernsey Press that action had not yet been taken.
In May 2007, department minister Geoff Mahy said he hoped the States would vote on the issue within three months and that the matter could be dealt with separately from new sexual offences legislation.
But that had not happened and the department’s position appeared to be similar today.
‘This issue has been with St James’s Chambers for a considerable period of time to enable suitable legislation to be drafted,’ said a spokesman for Home.
‘The Home Department remains in regular contact with St James’s Chambers on this matter.’
He added that the sexual age of consent sat within a large area of related legislation that was under review.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
Come On Guernsey get with the Times… Thhis should be dealth with a soon as possible, issues like this should not even BE issues.
I cant understand why there has not been ANY action.
Guernsey – there are gay people here, if you like it or not, like there are gay people everywhere. You either deal with it, or dont and have a lot of protest on your hands.
Report abuse
This needs to be concluded. If equal rights aren’t implemented it may be a case of handbags at dawn!
Report abuse
Agree as is time for people like us to have the same rights
Report abuse
If lowing the age of consent is considered of “cruical” importance can I ask the good deputy what planet he resides on. Has he run out of real issues to jusitfy office.
Report abuse
The question is should adults be allowed to b***er 16 yr old children – I cant see anything wrong with two 18yr olds tying the knot so to speak.
Report abuse
What a nice thought for parents ? How many people will feel comfortable knowing that their son can be b***ered legally at 16 year old ? an age they are not even allowed to vote!The people that want this to happen are very sick indeed.
Report abuse
Neil
16 year old’s are entitled to vote.
Report abuse
@ Neil, so it’s okay for 16 year old GIRLS to get b***ered is it? Don’t be so stupid!! Obviously homophobic, what a shame for you. I pity you!
Report abuse
Neil
It is precisely this type of comment that proves that Guernsey is truly in the Dark Ages.
Report abuse
Neil – do you therefore suggest that we raise the age for heterosexual sex to 18? After all, parents have to accept that their daughters can be f****d at 16. The people that voted in that law, and all those who haven’t clamoured for the law to be struck out must also be very sick, according to your message. Or are you homophobic?
Report abuse
When you consider that under our legal system a 16 year old is considered too immature to buy alcohol or cigarettes, yet mature enough to get pregnant, perhaps the question we should be asking is not lowering the homosexual age of consent but raising the heterosexual age to 18.
Report abuse
I have nothing at all against homosexuals nor any other sexuals ,why should I ? chidren should not be encouraged to have sex at 16 year old regardless of sexuality. And as I said only the sick among you would not agree
Report abuse
Belinda, yes personally I think it would be a good thing to raise the age for heterosexual sex – however, you and I both know that would be like trying to put on a Nativity Play in Guernsey. Impossible since you can’t find three wise men and a virgin.
Age of consent won’t stop sex either between the same sex or otherwise happening.
Report abuse
Neil
The problem is that 16 year olds will have sex, probably younger too. The point is about not discriminating against homosexual 16 year olds. Why should they be criminalised when their heterosexual mates are not?
Raising the age of consent is just condemning more people to the criminal justice system, and for what? Biology is not immoral. Consent is consent. No means no. That is the line society should take, not pointing at minorities and deciding they are ‘unworthy’ of being included in society.
Report abuse
Fast Robert – simply using the argument “biology is not immoral” sends a dangerous message. By that rationate, sexual intercourse with anyone who has reached childbearing age becomes legitimate, as it is biologically natural. That means that there would be nothing morally wrong with a man having sex with a girl as soon as her menstrual cycle begins (12 years old, sometimes even younger) as after all, if she has reached childbearing age, she is “biologically” ready for sex. Such behaviour is considered wrong in our society on moral grounds, not biological grounds – and rightly so.
Sexuality cannot simply be treated “biologically” – it also requires a moral / ethical dimension. The law, flawed though it is, gives a moral and ethical guideline of what is acceptable in society. It is designed to protect people: from others and often from themselves. I agree that, human nature being what it is, people will always seek to push the limits. That makes it even more important to ensure we provide a strong moral framework for what is/is not acceptable behaviour in our society.
Report abuse
Ill get my coat then !
Report abuse
Paul Le P
We are not talking about relative morality. On one hand we have some sixteen year olds having sex and not being criminalised, on the other we treat some as immoral individuals to be marginalised and an abhorrence of nature, just for an arbitary difference in sexual preference.
Rightly, we have frameworks in place to protect minors, but if it has been acceptable to treat 16 year olds as majors in other aspects, then so it must be acceptable for homosexuals to feel they are not being ‘underground’ when they express themselves as themselves.
No more dangerous message than wanting equality and to conform with some very basic human rights.
Report abuse
Surely it’s a case of crossing out the 18 on the law and inserting (pardon the pun) the word 16. Even the Law Officers wouldn’t be able to drag that one out for 4 years.
Report abuse
The gay age of consent is higher because 16 year olds are confused still…
Older homosexuals can take advantage of confused 16 year old children (after all – that what they still are) & this is wrong…
Dont talk about biology either – humans are designed to partner up with members of the opposite sex – our bodies are not designed for same sex relations…
16 year olds are still growing confused children – it is sick that older homosexuals can prey on confused kids… When they are 18 then their mind is made up…
For the record I would also like the normal age of consent raised to 18 – however I cant see it happening anytime soon
Report abuse
Fast Robert – I dispute whether 16 year olds are considered “majors” in Guernsey. Consider what a 16 year old is prohibited by law from doing in Guernsey:
- Driving a car
- Buying cigarettes
- Buying alcohol
- In addition, I’m pretty sure 16 year olds are not allowed to be identified publically if they commit a criminal offence – correct me if I’m wrong on this one.
In the case of heterosexual consent, I find it astounding that a 16 year old is considered mature enough to make a decision to have children, yet evidently not mature enough to drive a car or make wise choices with cigarettes and alcohol.
In the case of homosexual consent (if the age of consent was reduced) I would find it equally astounding that as a society, we would effectively be telling 16 year olds they are emotionally mature enough to make choices about their sexual preferences yet not mature enough to drive a car or buy cigarettes/alcohol.
Personally, I think the age limits for driving and alcohol/cigarettes are reasonable. They’re not perfect as they make generalisations and give no provision for individual maturity but that is impossible to do legally as it is a subjective point of view.
I personally do not believe that the majority of 16 year olds are emotionally mature enough to make choices on their sexual preference at the age of 16. Neither do I believe the vast majority of 16 year olds in our society are mature enough to raise children. That is why I believe the heterosexual age of consent should be raised to 18 rather than the homosexual age of consent reduced to 16. Such a move would provide the “human rights equality” so many crave yet also protect the vulnerable – the very reason for the law’s existence.
Report abuse
I have two children. One boy and one girl. I don’t want either of them to be having sex at 16. It’s too young. This is the problem in the UK and Guernsey. CHildren having sex far too young. The country is morally bankrupt. Where I live overseas, to even consider this is unthinkable.
I am not homophobic in the slightest, I don’t think this is the issue for me, everyone can make their own choices, but at 16 my son and daughter will be children still. Physically able but psychologically prepared no. What goes on behind my back (so to speak!) is another matter as it was when I was a child of 16.
Report abuse
Thank god we still have people with Morals,I was begining to think I was on my own in believing children should not be having sex at such an early age.
Report abuse
The issue around the age of consent is not so much whether you think it is a good idea or not for 16 year olds to have sex (either homosexual or heterosexual); but whether you think they should be committing a criminal act for having sex.
Currently a 16 year old boy having sex with a 16 year old girl is in no danger of being prosecuted. On the other hand, two 16 year old boys having sex could be arrested, taken to court, tried, and imprisoned.
This is the issue behind equalizing the age of consent: it is about criminalizing behaviour, not whether society approves.
Report abuse
@James I agree.
I think there needs to be equality between heterosexual and homosexual. As it stands its not fair. a 17 year old gay man can not go out and have sex with another 17 old gay man, even though his ‘straight’ friends can.
Whether the heterosexual age is raised or the homosexual age is lowered then something needs to be done about that.
Whether i am gay or not is not relevant, this is about what’s right
Report abuse
To put it simply. If two 15yr olds, gay or not, want to have sex. They will. Whether it be in the school toilets, at one of their houses, at the park. They will find a way to. I think both ages should be the same as it is discrimination otherwise. Many of you say about pregnancies. Thats because schools dont talk about contraception till your 16, by which time many are no longer virgins. And lots of parents find it embarrasing.
Report abuse
Of course it has everything to do with whether society approves or not! We have to set a benchmark. Kids will always break the law – I did! I made my point about my son and daughter because I firmly believe that the age of consent should be raised to 18 for BOTH sexes, but yes I do agree with your point that their should be parity for both boys and girls. That is so wrong and needs to be addressed in this day and age.
Report abuse
Yes GsyGal
If the kids were in no doubt about what mucking about with sex was all about, with all the consequences taught in non-euphemistic and in frank, unembarrassed terms by both parents and teachers, and that sex wasn’t deemed as ‘sordid’ by wider society, then maybe the diseases and pregnancies would be less commonplace.
As for the age of consent; it has to be set somewhere to protect those unable to distinguish between coercion and consent, but also as not to criminalise a whole section of 16 and 17 year olds.
As GsyGal says, kids is as kids does and society has to provide knowledge and understanding in order for them to make choices that best forearms them of the pitfalls of growing up. But not by quasi-religious piety and prohibition.
Report abuse
GsyGal – although I don’t have issue with sex education at schools per se, it should be complementary to parental responsibility, not a replacement for it. In fact I cannot personally think of any excuse (apart from mental illness or lack of access) that legitimately removes that responsibility from parents.
I agree it happens but it’s a frankly ridiculous state of affairs that parents find it embarrasing to talk about sex with their children – after all, it was sex that produced them for goodness sake! I will soon be a parent and have every intention of teaching my child when the time comes. This comes from a deeply held belief that my wife and I are primarily responsible for our child’s upbringing, not the State and I’d rather know what values our child is being taught.
All that aside, I find it extremely difficult to believe that the majority of 15 year olds (for example) don’t know where babies come from, even if the source of that information is somewhat dubious such as their mates, teeny magazines or the Internet!
Report abuse
Paul Le P. I completely agree, the responsibility really should be on the parents.
What i find more worrying is the fact 15/16yr olds believe myths such as, you cant get pregnant the first time you have sex, cant get pregnant if the girls on top etc. But thats rather off topic for this discussion.
Report abuse
people don’t care at all about ages of consent! They will do what they want to do regardless.
Report abuse
If Ian Tripp does not consider equal human rights for all to be of crucial importance perhaps we should ask on which planet he resides.
I am very disappointed to see the number of homophobic comments that have been made in response to Mr. Roffey’s point.
Report abuse
Lets turn this one on its head.
I imagine the purpose of the current laws are to protect young people? So if two 15 year old boys, girls, whatever, are “caught” then a prosicution is very unlikely.
However (as an example) if a 45 year old man has sex with a 16 year old boy…what’s that? I just have a problem from that perspective – 16 is just too young to enter into a meaningful concentual relationship.
Frankly one’s sexual orientation is not that important here (and neither should it be). Personally I’d raise the age of consent to 18 – but use common sense.
Report abuse
Gilthead – that is an excellent point. By having the age of consent at 16, it becomes legal for predatory characters of either sexual preference to take advantage of young, naive and vulnerable people. Having the age of consent at 18 won’t eliminate that risk but it certainly helps.
I also agree there are times when a prosecution is not in the public interest however common sense should be (and already often is) applied in such cases – as while those cases are upsetting and often damaging for the parties concerned, adding a criminal record would not benefit anyone long term.
Report abuse
If you’re in love why should you be punished to wait to show your love? Gay or not. YES 16 should be the right all for ALL people!!
Report abuse
So Paul Le P and Gilthead, what you propoase it to potentially criminalise the overwhelming majority of teenagers because of a perceived threat of ‘predators’ that abound on every corner?
All raising the age for heteros will do is reinforce the idea that Guernsey is anti-youngster, anti-feedom and reactionary. I mean, why not base all of our laws on Daily Mail headlines?
You would be forcing sex ‘underground’. Young people would take more risks as to not get caught, parents would be more wary, the subject would become more taboo.
Report abuse
Loopy – I have heard 12 year olds say they are “in love” before (I remember in my teenage years thinking I was “in love”!) I hope you’re not suggesting they should also be legally permitted to “show their love”? I would perhaps suggest that a more accurate definition would be infactuation and/or young people coming to terms with their changing physiology and the emotional changes as they transition from childhood to adulthood.
The age of consent is not based on emotions. It is a mechanism designed to protect people from others who might take advantage of emotional immaturity and confusion (e.g. Gilthead’s post above). It is also designed to protect people from themselves until they are of sufficient maturity to understand the consequences (positive and negative) of their actions.
Interestingly enough, as things stand a 16 year old is allowed to have sex without parental consent yet is not allowed to marry without that consent until they reach 18. This clearly shows that society does not consider a 16 year old emotionally mature enough to commit to a loving relationship without outside involvement. In my view this also means they are not mature enough to have sex. Incidentally I would raise the legal marriage age to 18 as well as the age of consent and remove the parental consent clause completely.
I will concede that there may be some 16 year olds who are emotionally mature enough to commit to a loving relationship. As I mentioned earlier, the law cannot take this into account and has to generalise to an extent. I don’t see this as a problem however as I’m sure a 16 year old couple who truly love each other will be able to restrain themselves for two years! If they cannot, I would question whether they truly do love each other, or whether their feelings are more infactuation than love.
As a little aside, the word “love” has been cheapened to such an extent that it often means little more than infactuation or simple physical attraction. For example, a man loves his wife, yet being a man he is at times physically attracted to other women. Despite that attraction he only has sex with his wife, as he has chosen to love her and commit to her for life. This means forsaking passing physical desires out of love. Physical attraction can come and go – love endures because it is based on a choice to commit, not day to day feelings or a passing fancy.
Report abuse
So, Paul Le P, you would criminalise teenagers for being infatuated with each other??? Your argument clearly demonstrates your disgust for those who act on their physical desires. Who does it hurt if teenagers or, indeed, adults, are having sex outside of the confines of marriage? I accept that some people believe that sex and love are inseparable – for the majority this is not the case. Sex is something fun, a way of exploring your changing body, a way of expressing yourself. Why should two 16 years olds restrain themselves from engaging in an activity which does no harm to themselves or to society?
Surely it is better to say – yes, we accept that you want to have sex but please be safe. Criminalising perfectly natural behaviour will lead to increased teenage pregnancies etc as teenagers feel unable to talk to teachers or parents.
Sex isn’t bad. Time to stop thinking that it is wrong. It is fun and natural and something that should be enjoyed. Once people start accepting that, and being more open, I think there would be a drop in teenage pregnancies, the transmission of STDs.
Report abuse
One of the difficulties with lowering the age is the same phenomenon which happens with drink driving. Just over the limit is mitigation for a lesser fine or sentence. I would not like to see gay paedophiles using this law to their advantage.
Report abuse
Is homosexuality nature or nurture if the former then I suppose it doesnt matter.
Report abuse
Belinda – although your assumptions on my character are of no relevance to me or this argument, for the record I have no personal disgust for anyone. On the contrary, it is possible to disagree with a particular pattern of behaviour yet bear no personal ill feeling to those that practice it.
Back to the debate – I think you are looking at sex from a purely physical level and ignoring the psychological / emotional side intrinsically linked with it. I’m no professional but even a cursory investigation will demonstrate that most mental health experts agree there are emotional effects to sexual behaviour.
Irrespective of one’s personal views on marriage, sex, sexuality, the purpose of the law in regard to the age of consent is to protect the vulnerable. In my view this is best achieved by protecting young people and providing an environment for them to develop safely until they are in a position to make a well reasoned choice. It is not about criminalising young people – as I mentioned in an earlier post prosecution is not always in the public interest.
Report abuse
Fast Robert et al.
I’m certainly not suggesting that teenagers are suppressed in any way shape or form. But where do you draw the line? The age of 16 (or 18) is a notional line in the sand.
IMO young people – no hang on, children – are maturing emotionally later than they used to. It’s anecdotal, granted, but I talk to a lot of 15 to 19 year olds and they have a very different view of the world than I did at that age. The immaturity of some is quite staggering. As is the arrogance.
I’m sorry but I want my kids protected until the theoretical age of adulthood is reached at 18.
Report abuse
@jackie: gay paedophiles? what about straight paedophiles?
Report abuse
Paul Le P ,Great comments!.Common sense is still alive. Belinda – what utter rubbish you spout.
Report abuse
Nice to see homophobia alive and well in the island. What happened when they equalised the age of consent in the UK a few years ago? Nothing really. And when they equalised it in Jersey and the Isle of Man two or three years ago? A spate of older men preying on 16 year olds trying to “turn” them gay? No, of course not. But, anyway, regardless of the moral indignation from some contributors and the debate about what the age of consent should be, the island has no real choice about making it equal for gay and straight people. The European Court of Human Rights has decided that having a different age of consent for gay people is discrimination that amounts to a breach of the Human Rights Convention (case of L. and V. v Austria). The current position could be challenged under the Human Rights Law. If the States still didn’t equalise the age of consent after that the case could be taken to Strasbourg. The island would lose the case, be found liable for costs and damages, and it would then be under a direct positive obligation to change the law.
Report abuse
Gilthead
Protected against what?
Report abuse
The fact of the matter is, homosexuality and heterosexuality are two different things. I think everyone has become so caught up in conservative, equality b.s. that they cannot see that simple fact of nature. As someone said above, at age 16 most teenagers who think they are gay may just be curious and are simply confused; is lowering the age of consent to 16 really the best thing to do, when those who are applicable to this law change may be in such a fragile mindset? Or is it therefore a better idea to keep it at 18 where they are legally seen as adults and therefore can make their own decision regarding the matter? I understand heterosexual consent being at sixteen because there are more heterosexuals in the world than homosexuals, so therefore it is accepted that it is the “normal”, and that most at this age are fairly adament that they are straight, if they are in a situation where straight sex is an option.
That said, it will make little difference. People will continue to have sex at any age, that is the nature of the beast. I’ll admit that my morals and theories on life tell me that homosexuality is unnatural, but my views on this as a whole are irrelevent; I think my opinions on the matter are fairly unbiased and can be understood by most.
Report abuse
2009, pathetic.
Report abuse
@Jackie:
It is a well-documented fact that the vast majority of paedophile predators are either family members or close acquaintances of the victims – simply a matter of ease of access. And by far the most are heterosexual. If the age of consent is 16 or 18 is completely irrelevant in the context of paedophiles, anyway, because they lose interest as soon as the kids enter puberty, which happens quite a bit earlier these days.
Concerning the Age of Consent question generally, I’ll quote from Wikipedia:
“The ages of consent for sexual activity vary by jurisdiction across Europe. The Vatican City has the lowest age of consent in Europe (set at 12) while Turkey and Malta have the highest, set at 18…” [In many countries the age of consent is 14 (e.g.Germany) or 15 (Denmark or France)]
“…a higher age of consent just for male-male sexual conduct are noted in Gibraltar, Greece (for the male-male partners over 18) and Guernsey. All other places in Europe have an equal age of consent, regardless of sexual orientation and/or gender.”
In case you now feel glad you’re on the same page as Greece, let me add that “The age of consent in Greece is 15 for heterosexual relations and 17 for male homosexual relations (homosexual sexual relations with those aged 15-17 are legal if both participants are minors).” So Gibraltar and Guernsey are really the last hold-outs in Europe.
If you think 16 is too young, there is the example of Cyprus: “The age of consent for “carnal knowledge”/”fornication” in Cyprus is 17 for both heterosexual and homosexual acts. {Article 154} The Age of Consent for Woman/Boy anal intercourse is 13 years. No age limit for other contacts”
Food for thought?
Report abuse
Yes Bryn, See Matt P.
Next they’ll be saying that God created Man in His own image and Woman was a spare rib.
Report abuse
It’s good to see homophobia, narrow mindlessness, ignorance & prejudice are still all alive and well in Guernsey……….The same rights should be for all not just for heterosexuals.
Report abuse
Is a a male paedophile that fiddles male children not gay?
Report abuse
@ jackie, whether or not you lower the same-sex age limit will not stop paedo’s, straight or gay, using children.
Good old Guernsey – a link to this page has been sent to Gay Times magazine to see what they make of it all…
Report abuse
Fast Robert – themselves!
Report abuse