Age of consent for spanking

Is there a lawyer in the forum? I'm just curious why the age of 18 often seems to be associated with consensual spanking, whereas the sexual age of consent (in the UK at least) is 16. Perhaps this is a grey area which has never been tested in the courts? (My interest in this is purely academic!)

If someone understands that distinction, maybe they can explain why a girl can consent to sex, which can lead to pregnancy or STDs, at 16 but has to wait 5 more years to be able to buy a bottle of wine to go with dinner?

The mysteries of American life are beyond us poor Europeans, but I am sure there is a reason somewhere. Even in Norway, usually very restrictive when it comes to alcohol, one can buy beer and wine at 18. Of course, as we don't have sex, the other part is irrelevant.

A hangover from Prohibition?

I was bemused, visiting California in the late 70's, to learn that you could drive a car at 15 but not buy alcohol till you were 21. In Europe, I think, rules are generally set around the less extreme 16-18 mark.

If I remember correctly, there used to be different drinking ages on either side of the Illinois-Wisconsin border (18 on one side and 21 on the other), and young people habitually got themselves killed driving home across the state line stone drunk in the middle of the night.

I was told it's a requirement to get federal funding for highways. The idea is you want learning to drive to be well away from learning to drink. Here in the UK its easy for an 15 year old to pretend to be 18 but tough to pretend to be 21.
Naturally along with compatriots it seems crazy but I understand that is the reason.

I was going to say that I had never heard of an "age of consent" for spanking, but that's not true. In some school stories corporal punishment of students must be approved (either in general, or just in a specific instance) by a parent unless the student is 18, in which case he/she can consent (generally in lieu of some other form of punishment. I have no idea whether such a concept is employed in real life.

I am pretty sure that nowhere in the U.S. can a person of any age "consent" to being spanked as part of any kind of business deal - employment, lease, loan, professional mentorship, etc.

"Consent," whether for fun or punishment, can presumably be given in a personal relationship.. but be wary of it being withdrawn. I suspect that, if the relationship were between an adult and a minor there would ALWAYS be issues, perhaps even if the minor was above the age of consent for sex. I have never actually heard of such a distinction being embedded in the law.

In USA courts have held that 21 can be the age one must pass before taking intoxicants because two constitutional amendments deal with them. Since full citizenship rights come with voting at 18 most things can not use an age restriction beyond that. There has to be strict scrutiny applied.

I wonder if the 'age of consent' for consensual spanking is to do with pornography as you cannot legally buy porn under the age of 18 or see a film that is an 18 ( used to be X rated and it was used as a selling point.) Also when I have got to any fetish fair with Himself you had to be over 18 to enter the premises where the fetish fair is being held. Leading on from that it makes kinda sense for the fetish fairs to be held in nightclubs/ gay nightclubs so the general population are used to it being an over 18 thing and not out of the ordinary plus i suspect finding a venue that will let you hold a fetish fair might be potentially difficult - i don't know as i have never tried to organise one.

Strictly speaking - with my limited understanding of the law in England and Wales - you cannot consent to any act if it is actually assault - this i checked on cps.gov.UK

Assault occasioning Actual Bodily Harm Offences against the Person [1861] section 47
"The offence is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly assaults another"…"Any hurt calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim: such hurt need not be permanent, but must be more than transient and trifling": (R v Donovan [1934]


https://www.cps.gov.uk/leUKl-guidance/offences-against-person-incorporating-charging- standard

I am not a lawyer nor do I hold a law degree, this is just some research I did on Google. I had a vague idea about this as I am the daughter of a career copper and used to help him study and I also used to update his full set of rules and regs and law changes etc when necessary and I won't get into what a total nightmare inserting the relevant pages for Police And Criminal Evidence Act [1984] was!

That's my twopenth and now I will go and crawl back under my rock and do some work.

One last thing -
http://www.spannertrust.org/

x
pim

That is true about funding, but saying it's for funding merely states 'what' the situation is yet still doesn't explain the 'why'. Whatever logic is used to rationalize age limits based on danger levels conveniently ignores equivalent dangers for things where the age requirement is lower. (Also to say that raising the drinking age to 21 prevents accidents ignores the slippery slope that such a rationale could then be used for any age. 21? Why not 31? 41? 91? It's pure nonsense.) Personally, I never had to deal with this illogical, and in my opinion discriminatory BS, and I completely and fully blame voting 18 year-olds for the last several generations for putting up with this nonsense.