I was 14. He was 22. If it wasn’t grooming, what is?

The thorny question is that if the AoC were set too low and it would behoove us to raise it, how would we know? What would we expect to see?

If same-age high school relationships really traumatized women so much, feminists would have no issue calling this period simply “too young” for dating in hindsight and discourage the next generation from doing it. Part of the reason high school boys tend not to act as badly is that they’re in a shared social milieu, where bad behavior has reputational consequences, and just as girls are accountable to their parents when they’re finally allowed to have “official” relationships, boys are accountable to theirs. When an older man dates a young woman at the age of consent, our society is atomized enough that he’s not really accountable to anyone (except the law if it bothers to get him in particular). You could say, “He can promise her parents to treat her well,” but that’s not the same thing as his parents’ judgment, which is something non-Western societies still enforce a lot more strongly on young men. If a young man pisses off the parents of a young woman he’s courting, oh well, nothing really happens. This obviously isn’t the state of nature, but the social rationale is genuine.

I agree that it’s genuine, I don’t really buy takes that writers like her are hiding some kind of secret rationale that they won’t say in public, like they are jealous of younger women. Taking her reasoning as genuine, the biggest flaws are that she lacks empathy for good men due to being too self-valuing and self-obsessed, and she fails to see that her bad relationship might as well be punishment from God for abandoning normal monogamous norms. She let the guy cheat on her. The solution to what happened to her is anti-adultery laws and traditional marriage. She opposes these because she is wicked in her feminism and goes a step further in her wickedness by being prideful enough to try to ban beautiful romantic relationships like Will and Ariel Durant because it would make life more comfortable for the worst sort of women, aka her aka frigid feminists, not because they are jealous but because they instinctively hate traditional marriage and so will get “preyed on” by play boys when they are young, the natural consequence of their fault.

Well said.

I’d also add that if we accept sexually inclined 14 year olds as functionally “adults,” a load-bearing premise is lost in today’s moral concerns around teens. If they’re adults, what’s so wrong about having explicit romantasy books in high school libraries, given that they’re in adult sections of local libraries too? What’s wrong with adults ideologically recruiting them online? What’s wrong with prescribing 14 year olds birth control without their parents’ consent? What’s wrong with someone who insists she’s dead-bent on medically gender-transitioning getting it out of the way as a teenager rather than waiting until adulthood? I know you don’t agree with the moral content of these decisions, but there’s a common belief on the Right that the harms are compounded by the age dimension. Even if teenagers are understood not to be “children,” it could be fair to acknowledge that the trajectory set in this time is both more suggestible and more irreversible, and that is reason enough not to view them as fellow “adults” and let them equally access all the things “adults” have the right to access.

I will ignore the content of the post itself because it seems to be in the context of modern culture, and modern culture should just be exterminated. The question of age of consent is only interesting in the context of a decent culture.

A decent culture should ban sex outside of marriage and prostitution because such sex (slut sex) is dysgenic. A 14-year-old shouldn’t be allowed to go into prostitution because that rules out marriage and she is too young to make that decision. And a 14-year-old shouldn’t marry because she is too young to properly raise children. The age of consent for marriage should be based on when women are considered mature enough to be mothers.

And a 14-year-old shouldn’t marry because she is too young to properly raise children. The age of consent for marriage should be based on when women are considered mature enough to be mothers.

What minimum age of marriage do you suggest? Is it higher or lower than the pre-industrial global standard? Why?

I don’t know what the pre-industrial global standard was, so I would have to research this to give a good answer. But my rough feeling is that the minimum age of marriage should be 15 with parental approval, 18 without parental approval.

The pre-industrial global standard was 12-14. Here’s why: today I saw a very pregnant 14 year old with her mother at a local hospital. In many Demos-ruled countries, they will not arrest the father, if he is somewhere under 19 years old, which he likely is. In some such countries, they will not arrest him at all. In none do they punish the mother or force an abortion of the baby, so what use is arresting the father anyway in the remaining polities? I am of no doubt that the girl snuck around and had voluntary sex which her parents disapproved of and were unable to stop, so there was no rape. You are faced with the natural fact, then, that this is how it works by that age for very many girls. What do you do with that natural fact? Pre-industrial polities did shotgun marriage or preventative marriage, ie the parents know this girl is a slut with a high sex drive so they marry her off to the best husband they can find early and he will do the ancient thing if she cheats on him etc. This makes sense to me and is even eugenic contra what we have now – probably the baby was half black, if she had been prevention married in a traditional society that would not be the case. Modern demos are hubristic so they think they can negotiate with mother nature, or dominate it with the poorly thought out application of handcuffs, cages, and propaganda (instead of eugenics, which could make puberty hit later, although this would be retarded when you could probably breed a race that is fully grown by 10 years with median IQs of 140+), and of course it doesn’t work and it just creates a lot of injustice, strife, and wasted time.

Okay, I see your point. This is the Old Testament approach which makes a lot of sense. The ideal would be to remove people from the gene pool who have sex outside of marriage or prostitution, in which case an older minimum age of marriage would work. But the Old Testament approach has clearly also worked historically.