But what are rights to begin with? Take this as purely a devil's argument and not something I am advocating, please.
Let's take a 30 year old and a 15 year old. We accept in a society that two 15 year olds can consent to sex to each other. We do not accept that a 30 year old and a 15 year old can consent to sex.
But for a person with a sexual preference for teens, their attraction is
(a) something they can't control
and
(b) something that doesn't harm anyone if there is consent between both parties.
There is a lot of room for argument here. Take a 15 year old and 19 year old. Is that okay? What about 17 and 19? Where's the line? How can it possibly be the case that age difference necessarily indicates a power differential that inhibits consent in all circumstances?
So we are in a pickle now. Either this similar argument is wrong, and hence the original argument can be questioned, or this argument is good, and hence the majority cultural belief about such relationships needs to be drastically questioned.
Either way, we should allow people to voice their arguments.
But for a person with a sexual preference for teens, their attraction is
(a) something they can't control
and
(b) something that doesn't harm anyone if there is consent between both parties.
Honestly, I haven't seen much evidence for point (b). It ultimately comes down to experience and power-dynamics. We can accept that two people of the same age do not have a drastic advantage over each other. It is much less likely that a thirty year old does not have an advantage over a fifteen year old. Even if that advantage is one that is not acknowledged by either party, it exists to some degree.
A minor is someone who we have arbitrarily decided has less ability to determine how to act compared to an adult. Yes, different cultures having different ages indicate that this is arbitrary, and yes it is difficult to know where to draw the line exactly, but the fact is that to protect minors the line needs to be drawn somewhere. It is mildly contradictory that a 16 year old in Britain can sign up for the armed forces, have a child, and get married, but they are not allowed to drink or drive a car. That doesn't mean that those boundaries should not exist, however.
Ultimately the exact definition of these sorts of things come down to cultural handshakes. Why do people drive on the left-side or right-side of the road? It's a cultural handshake. Consent between two parties of different emotional maturity is a difficult thing to figure out, hence why we have the cultural handshake that says that for certain parties it is unacceptable for them to liasion at certain ages.
To say that those power dynamics apply to two adult men of the same age, is -- to put it mildly -- ridiculous.
Again, the question is whether or not there can be consent, not whether or not there is a power differential. The existence of a power differential doesn't necessarily mean there can't be consent. Citizens consent to, for instance, the regulations relating to driving when they get their license that the government (which is superior to the individual) sets.
But again, my main point stands. If we are to shut down any discussion of the scenario I gave, which many people would be willing to do, by your own considering this would be shutting down a discussion on whether we can drive on the right side of the road or whether we should shake hands.
And then this is predicated on such lack of debate not causing any harm, when it can be argued there is similar harm as what people say gay people experience.
Again, please, these are devil's advocate arguments. Not personal views.
Let's take a 30 year old and a 15 year old. We accept in a society that two 15 year olds can consent to sex to each other. We do not accept that a 30 year old and a 15 year old can consent to sex.
But for a person with a sexual preference for teens, their attraction is
(a) something they can't control
and
(b) something that doesn't harm anyone if there is consent between both parties.
There is a lot of room for argument here. Take a 15 year old and 19 year old. Is that okay? What about 17 and 19? Where's the line? How can it possibly be the case that age difference necessarily indicates a power differential that inhibits consent in all circumstances?
So we are in a pickle now. Either this similar argument is wrong, and hence the original argument can be questioned, or this argument is good, and hence the majority cultural belief about such relationships needs to be drastically questioned.
Either way, we should allow people to voice their arguments.