{
  "block": 106145547,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "7117.059104 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2026-05-18T02:00:39",
  "trx_id": "85ebfdc4e5bbf904fa8e421aad1292ff615613ba",
  "trx_in_block": 3,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 105984238,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "4404.848699 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2026-05-12T10:57:39",
  "trx_id": "50253940f1a4f8ec794b80c8ab6a154f199b9a15",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 105513147,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "7129.574860 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2026-04-26T01:18:45",
  "trx_id": "1ac010c1aaa97c7866930f76104d07c0453d3f45",
  "trx_in_block": 5,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 102857460,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "4446.395518 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2026-01-23T12:30:54",
  "trx_id": "f7ea66932f3f5d2c28dc2aca2b4a53b1fbc044c7",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 91303807,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "4610.614715 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2024-12-17T07:47:30",
  "trx_id": "e5cfe3af1c92b2c333aa10aa5495bba0e3c87c42",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 79857993,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "4779.748247 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2023-11-13T23:29:33",
  "trx_id": "6c6d8851f707cd01dfb0ac96b3e37eea03bf3f9e",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 78350309,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "7717.027033 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2023-09-21T23:54:09",
  "trx_id": "22f9f2ca2b7321f4ee40d6ff1ddd3a0c165c7e2e",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 69115322,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "7938.708471 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2022-11-03T13:25:51",
  "trx_id": "fc78c7862e445db35135dfeaee600cce4d59b1a7",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 60816409,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "8158.943607 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2022-01-17T16:48:54",
  "trx_id": "3ed5cebdb8bbbde29b3551ef992856481eba1554",
  "trx_in_block": 9,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 54609614,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "8343.010360 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2021-06-14T02:24:00",
  "trx_id": "4a37071c6486580ee86271088b14e27fd0564776",
  "trx_in_block": 9,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 49357011,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "8530.432334 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2020-12-11T12:40:42",
  "trx_id": "58593cff3d01742a9840373d5b75917344091302",
  "trx_in_block": 5,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 49208565,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "1912.543513 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2020-12-06T06:17:30",
  "trx_id": "267c559ddbd25c69518b87e90d80f586e6de11c8",
  "trx_in_block": 9,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 49192110,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "8536.640188 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2020-12-05T16:18:54",
  "trx_id": "ee06eca849314efefe6f85e68b09bc5d3c2a3856",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 48261565,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "1920.017158 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2020-11-02T18:50:00",
  "trx_id": "70919385ab17564e559bf88e14ac64526ee5cbd6",
  "trx_in_block": 1,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 43218835,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "8739.445547 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2020-05-09T07:16:30",
  "trx_id": "f7a908c7c95580d99a463aee78509b04f7a65a96",
  "trx_in_block": 15,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 43195204,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "1953.311140 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2020-05-08T11:06:36",
  "trx_id": "49d15dec1dd22ab9ca2fc9de8ede143f6e7c84b8",
  "trx_in_block": 8,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 38634244,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "8828.456522 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2019-11-30T18:14:09",
  "trx_id": "81b07f3c343b2561ba13f361a2e13b6ce86b2710",
  "trx_in_block": 22,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 38413451,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "steemitboard",
      "body": "Congratulations @johnnyt1991! You received a personal award!\n\n<table><tr><td>https://steemitimages.com/70x70/http://steemitboard.com/@johnnyt1991/birthday2.png</td><td>Happy Birthday! - You are on the Steem blockchain for 2 years!</td></tr></table>\n\n<sub>_You can view [your badges on your Steem Board](https://steemitboard.com/@johnnyt1991) and compare to others on the [Steem Ranking](https://steemitboard.com/ranking/index.php?name=johnnyt1991)_</sub>\n\n\n###### [Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness](https://v2.steemconnect.com/sign/account-witness-vote?witness=steemitboard&approve=1) to get one more award and increased upvotes!",
      "json_metadata": "{\"image\":[\"https://steemitboard.com/img/notify.png\"]}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners",
      "permlink": "steemitboard-notify-johnnyt1991-20191123t015406000z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2019-11-23T01:54:06",
  "trx_id": "1857c613f49cb3db02394ba021797caade34009c",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 28953498,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "9025.604012 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-12-28T07:52:36",
  "trx_id": "8418e844b2d7d0561f2a3dd1855c984bc80fd502",
  "trx_in_block": 11,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 27938024,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "steemitboard",
      "body": "Congratulations @johnnyt1991! You received a personal award!\n\n<table><tr><td>https://steemitimages.com/70x70/http://steemitboard.com/@johnnyt1991/birthday1.png</td><td>1 Year on Steemit</td></tr></table>\n\n<sub>_[Click here to view your Board of Honor](https://steemitboard.com/@johnnyt1991)_</sub>\n\n\n**Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:**\n<table><tr><td><a href=\"https://steemit.com/steemfest/@steemitboard/meet-the-steemians-contest-the-results-the-winners-and-the-prizes\"><img src=\"https://steemitimages.com/64x128/https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmeLukvNFRsa7RURqsFpiLGEZZD49MiU52JtWmjS5S2wtW/image.png\"></a></td><td><a href=\"https://steemit.com/steemfest/@steemitboard/meet-the-steemians-contest-the-results-the-winners-and-the-prizes\">Meet the Steemians Contest - The results, the winners and the prizes</a></td></tr><tr><td><a href=\"https://steemit.com/steemfest/@steemitboard/meet-the-steemians-contest-special-attendees-revealed\"><img src=\"https://steemitimages.com/64x128/https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmeLukvNFRsa7RURqsFpiLGEZZD49MiU52JtWmjS5S2wtW/image.png\"></a></td><td><a href=\"https://steemit.com/steemfest/@steemitboard/meet-the-steemians-contest-special-attendees-revealed\">Meet the Steemians Contest - Special attendees revealed</a></td></tr><tr><td><a href=\"https://steemit.com/steemfest/@steemitboard/meet-the-steemians-contest-intermediate-results\"><img src=\"https://steemitimages.com/64x128/https://cdn.steemitimages.com/DQmeLukvNFRsa7RURqsFpiLGEZZD49MiU52JtWmjS5S2wtW/image.png\"></a></td><td><a href=\"https://steemit.com/steemfest/@steemitboard/meet-the-steemians-contest-intermediate-results\">Meet the Steemians Contest - Intermediate results</a></td></tr></table>\n\n> Support [SteemitBoard's project](https://steemit.com/@steemitboard)! **[Vote for its witness](https://v2.steemconnect.com/sign/account-witness-vote?witness=steemitboard&approve=1)** and **get one more award**!",
      "json_metadata": "{\"image\":[\"https://steemitboard.com/img/notify.png\"]}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners",
      "permlink": "steemitboard-notify-johnnyt1991-20181123t011035000z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-11-23T01:10:36",
  "trx_id": "f58e59f92e4e13eb25bc398f0d6085b264db0679",
  "trx_in_block": 12,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 26333422,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "Does a 9-year old possess the aforesaid requirements? In short, I don't know, but the reason why I don't completely reject the possibility of them having the capacity to consent to sex is due to the fact that some people hit puberty when they are 9, which means they can certainly possess a sex drive, but determining whether or not they can fully comprehend or understand sex or information about it would require inductive evidence through the aforesaid methods (sex ed tests, body language and communication lucidity observations etc), preferably done by a unbiased psychologist. I'm being objective/scientific with this thought process and this actually isn't my personal view or opinion on it. If you want that, I would definitely bet against them being able to, but I haven't seen any damning evidence against it at this time unless the person is pre-pubescent.  Why do I get the feeling that you have no interest in being objective about this and that a certain retard named Finian (who doesn't comprehend anything about this issue and continuously asserts non-sequiturs and other logical fallacies while seeming to think that he is intelligent) gave you the idea to ask me this? Anyway, here's my honest answer. If you want my complete view on this entire issue read my past posts on it. You should also read Larken Rose's steemit and facebook posts about this if you want to see someone who isn't an emotional child speak about this issue. By the way, teach Finian basic logic for me, will you? ;)",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "kafkanarchy84",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners-20180917t023441000z",
      "permlink": "re-kafkanarchy84-re-johnnyt1991-explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners-20180928t070307106z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-28T07:03:09",
  "trx_id": "4ff6b7f6a58022f0731deab0266fd2561977e4cb",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 26027194,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "kafkanarchy84",
      "body": "Can a 9-year old consent?",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners-20180917t023441000z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-17T02:34:42",
  "trx_id": "7ff6244ac41999bff69bda93e8bd71d7ca4bdcb5",
  "trx_in_block": 5,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909834,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t083003007z",
      "voter": "finnian",
      "weight": -10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:44:48",
  "trx_id": "de7a4e116d9027a4570414671469853ce651e6cb",
  "trx_in_block": 21,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909831,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t080028541z",
      "voter": "finnian",
      "weight": -10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:44:39",
  "trx_id": "ff32b83b8f05fcb31c91ef749e5b4586e90f379b",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909829,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "voter": "finnian",
      "weight": -10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:44:33",
  "trx_id": "2c117809763bc0bd89b5e561b7dde68fd06cdbc4",
  "trx_in_block": 7,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909816,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t221943767z",
      "voter": "finnian",
      "weight": -10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:43:54",
  "trx_id": "4fef1c6c4fc3b929f7d52ac58a28b5d5e255cd8b",
  "trx_in_block": 26,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909814,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t222954467z",
      "voter": "finnian",
      "weight": -10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:43:48",
  "trx_id": "eaf0500f9a5ab9bf1f9dcd60a99ce28b160db604",
  "trx_in_block": 7,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909810,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t223256918z",
      "voter": "finnian",
      "weight": -10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:43:36",
  "trx_id": "5eeefd1ea698819dcaa6cf900a5bf31a8d8255c7",
  "trx_in_block": 25,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909805,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t223349095z",
      "voter": "finnian",
      "weight": -10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:43:21",
  "trx_id": "e4444a2ca735345fa6f257c7ec77ddaf202ce4b4",
  "trx_in_block": 19,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909674,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners",
      "voter": "finnian",
      "weight": -10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:36:48",
  "trx_id": "dafb1b8f4614b1156222d53233e3125b28a23ded",
  "trx_in_block": 22,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909669,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "body": "Wow, another wall of text.  I'm completely shocked.  I find it particularly entertaining that you refused to answer my questions in the other thread.  You do know that everything is permanent here, and anyone can see it even when the post is flagged, right?  That's the beauty of this place.  Everything is recorded forever for everyone to see. \n\nI didn't flag your last post either and had nothing to do with the account that did.  Don't be surprised if you keep getting flagged as well.  You are arguing for something that is disgusting and vile.  I tried to clarify if you were simply looking to get rid of stupid laws that make it illegal for a 15yo and a 16yo to have sex, but clearly that's not what you want.\n\nInstead, you are arguing for 9yo's to have sex simply because they bleed and can supposedly consent no matter how old the adult is that wants to have sex with them.  You also completely ignored the power the adult would have over such a young person.  You're sick, man.  Get some help.  Your trash isn't welcome here on Steemit either.  Good luck!",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners-20180913t003633217z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:36:33",
  "trx_id": "f31f38b95afa986199fd4430be4ce3fee797fbd6",
  "trx_in_block": 24,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909551,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners",
      "voter": "mawan51",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:30:39",
  "trx_id": "dfccce0bc122c845a1ff7a27cf17161062c47da7",
  "trx_in_block": 28,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909550,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners",
      "voter": "fastresteem",
      "weight": 100
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:30:36",
  "trx_id": "40ad92f6d9550af020330b4ea5b6c465f546ae4f",
  "trx_in_block": 18,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25909547,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "When I was writing my recent post, I had a feeling that I should have made a post that is specifically or ONLY about consent because of the fact that the vast majority of people who try to navigate this issue end up going off on a massive non-sequitur (something that has no logical connection to the argument and doesn't follow) when they try to argue for someone not being able to consent in certain contexts or dynamics. I have already been over this in the last post, but apparently, that was too long to read for a certain individual named Finnian, so he decided to go to the comment section of my last post and act like a complete retard, which is now muted because I don't want any idiocy on my posts. If anyone wants to see the full ''debate'' let me know and I'll post it.\n\n\nThis post is actually not for him since I don't think that he is mentally capable of comprehending basic logic. This post can be considered a ''beginners'' guide for being able to talk about this issue without looking like a complete idiot. If someone doesn't understand what consent is, and more specifically what the requirements are for ACTUAL consent, it's EXTREMELY likely that they will be talking about something that has no logical connection to consent and will end up talking out of their ass.\n\nActual consent is a mental process that only requires desire and the capacity to understand (intellectually) a particular activity once information about that specific activity (including its potential consequences) is given to an individual. There is also an obvious physical requirement. For example, if someone wants to engage in the game of basketball, they simply need a desire to participate and the mental capacity to comprehend information about that activity (and obviously the physical capacity to play as well). This is true of every single other activity, including sex. \n\n\nI feel like I need a physical demonstration for this, but I will just have to explain it as simply as I can and hope people that see this are smarter than the aforementioned individual. Assuming that two 14-year-olds have the capacity (both mentally and physically) to consent to sex, they can legitimately and consensually engage with each other in that activity by having the desire to have sex since they will be sexually attracted to each other, and by consensually agreeing to the activity through simple communication or by saying yes (this can be implicit if they just jump on each other, start having sex, and neither ones pulls away or voices any unwillingness to engage). \n\nA lot of people (probably voluntaryists or anarchists) wouldn't have a huge issue with the above situation taking place in reality. At the very most, they would worry about pregnancy or STD, which is an obvious practical issue but doesn't logically connect to a person's capacity to consent since people can obviously consent to things that have negative effects or consequences (holding the opposite position leads to absurdity in the form of not being able to say someone is responsible for murder or any other action that produces negative practical consequences, if someone can't consent or agree to what they are doing, they can't be held responsible).\n\n\nNow, when we take out one of the fourteen-year-olds and add in an older person of any significantly higher age (this is where an arbitrary, non-sequitur line is drawn) such as 30, people have a mental breakdown and start making supernatural-like claims and then end up using logical fallacies like begging the question and special pleading. Obviously, the older person could coerce the younger one into having sex and COULD (key word) do It a lot easier than a person that is the same age as the younger one.  However, this isn't a guarantee or even LIKELY to happen. \n\nAs I explained to the aforementioned retard, there is a huge difference between easiness and likelihood. Using the ''easiness' argument and logic and arguing for the banishment of those kinds of interactions, you can say that a parent could easily kill their newborn baby due to the fact that there is a MASSIVE strength or power differential between the two and that we can justify banning all of those interactions and all of the other interactions that involve children (ad reductio absurdum time). However, does that mean the person is LIKELY to do that? It's possible, but saying that it's likely or probable would require specific evidence that shows that the person has a history of doing that to children or even harming them (weaker inductive evidence). All of this applies to the previous context as well.\n\n\nNow, there are some people who seem to think that the older person in the former context automatically negates the younger person's ability to consent just by being much older. This goes into the supernatural-like claim that I mentioned earlier. So, according to these people, even though there is not any coercive action or behavior directed at the younger person by the older person, the younger person can't consent to sex (only sex or a sexual relationship) just because of other person's age. The reason why this is a supernatural-like claim is because of the fact that the age or experience of the older person is ultimately the condition and history of a human body. In order for any type of action or behavior to occur, the human body must be put into action through the mind.\n\n\n So yes, a more worn, used, and older human body can magically coerce a mind in a less worn, less used, and younger human body.  I really hope anyone that reads this understands the pure delusion and detachment from reality that someone has to possess to think this way. Obviously, this nonsense is nothing but the delusions of morally dumbfounded clowns who have the emotional maturity of a 2-year-old. \n\n\nIn order for a younger person to be unable to consent in a dynamic like that, the younger one must not have the mental or physical capacity to consent as an individual (that means they can't consent to anyone)  or the older person MUST PERFORM ACTUAL, PHYSICAL, AND COERCIVE ACTION OR BEHAVIOR AND THEN DIRECT IT TOWARDS THE YOUNGER ONE IN A WAY THAT NEGATES THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE CONSENSUAL SEX WITH THE OLDER INDIVIDUAL (''Have sex with me or else I will hurt your family'' or by forcing themselves on the younger one while the younger one is expressing distress and unwillingness in some way). \n\nNo, it doesn't matter hold old the older person is, even if he is 90-years-old. That doesn't magically cause coercion upon the younger person nor does it cause mental negation of any kind in the younger person. By the way, Finnian, you fucking retard, putting the label ''position of authority'' on that dynamic or upon the older person doesn't change the reality of the situation in your favor. That is just you being retarded and asserting an abstraction or a phrase and pretending that it necessarily manipulates reality.\n\n\nFor anyone wondering, no, I don't think that every single interaction like that is automatically consensual or that it's somehow impossible for it to be coercive or non-consensual. I don't assume anything because of the fact that I really don't give a shit who fucks each other unless there is evidence of coercion or evidence that one of the people involved doesn't have the capacity to consent. If you want to make the claim that an interaction or activity between two people is non-consensual or harmful, provide evidence or shut your fucking mouth about it. Also, don't call yourself a fucking voluntaryist if you think it's okay to initiate force on innocent people that you FEEL are acting non-consensually, without having any strong evidence or strong logic for doing.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\",\"anarchy\",\"consent\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "voluntaryism",
      "permlink": "explaining-consent-to-idiots-and-beginners",
      "title": "Explaining Consent to Idiots and Beginners"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-13T00:30:27",
  "trx_id": "54a9132a68823620969cf0f782eb6c30eb0d88cc",
  "trx_in_block": 12,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25908766,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition",
      "voter": "assbot",
      "weight": -10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T23:51:24",
  "trx_id": "65996140a75c50eee43c472dea3ec45639e4792d",
  "trx_in_block": 19,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25908753,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "body": "Yes, I'd love for @larkenrose to know you're spreading this shit and mentioning him.  Are you trying to ruin his reputation?",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"users\":[\"larkenrose\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t222954467z",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t235042890z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T23:50:45",
  "trx_id": "6eab592da629a23e8552323c06d81a02a45ce456",
  "trx_in_block": 6,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25908654,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "body": "You're sick.  Seek help.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t222954467z",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t234546214z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T23:45:48",
  "trx_id": "d38265f88db5de82393bc22a58df17229ed97925",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25907347,
  "op": [
    "custom_json",
    {
      "id": "follow",
      "json": "[\"follow\",{\"follower\":\"johnnyt1991\",\"following\":\"finnian\",\"what\":[\"ignore\"]}]",
      "required_auths": [],
      "required_posting_auths": [
        "johnnyt1991"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T22:40:24",
  "trx_id": "8c7bde1075379a666f401881b4da07c78560420f",
  "trx_in_block": 20,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25907300,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "Okay, at this point I'm only responding to your bullshit so that anyone who is watching this understands why you're wrong. I knew i shouldn't of wasted my time writing out actual arguments since  you obviously don't want to respond to them (and since you're obviously too fucking stupid to be able understand them) and just want to blindly assert your nonsense without backing it up with logic or evidence, use an appeal to popularity fallacy, ignore the fact that two people don't have to be equals (or close to it) to consent, and once again, ignore the reality of consent in terms of its ACTUAL requirements, which are, a desire to engage in an activity and the ability to intellectually understand that activity and it's potential consequences. \n\nIf a 14-year-old can consent to another 14-year-old, there is no reason they can't do so with anyone of any age, due to the fact that the individual possesses the abilities or requirements for sex.  Engaging with someone older doesn't automatically override those abilities; it will and can only happen if the older person ACTUALLY coerces the younger one with a SEPARATE coercive action. Stating otherwise is making a supernatural-like claim that is saying that the older person somehow negates the mental capabilities of the younger person just because they are older.\n\n\nTo finish up here, the first part of your post is just assuming that your conclusion is true and is supported in those contexts (evidence?), which is irrelevant to whether or not your conclusion is true and is the begging the question fallacy where you continue to assert your conclusion in your premises without actually supporting them with logic or evidence.\n\n''Most people do not though. They see those situations for what they are'' First, an Ad Populum or appeal to popularity fallacy, just because most people agree with a claim or assertion doesn't the claim or assertion true. Secondly and once again, you are implicitly assuming that your conclusion is true by saying that you and those other people see those situations ''for what they are''. You are stuck on the begging the question fallacy and also on a non-sequitur from up above since you think that two people being equal (or close to it) has any logical connection to their ability to consent to each other, again, if they both have the aforesaid requirements, they can both consent, even if they are not equals in intelligence or anything else. You are detached from reality and simply don't understand consent if you think otherwise.\n\n''You can write a wall of text if you want, but just say you disagree with the reasons'' Uh, no? This isn't a matter of opinion. All of your nonsense can easily be refuted and exposed with logic and actual THINKING. You would know this if you weren't a lazy clown that refuses to read and comprehend  5-7 paragraphs of text at a time.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t140656540z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t223349095z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T22:38:03",
  "trx_id": "ee6e739b27be085daf41c8b6512b2f8e650191d0",
  "trx_in_block": 45,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25907259,
  "op": [
    "custom_json",
    {
      "id": "follow",
      "json": "[\"follow\",{\"follower\":\"johnnyt1991\",\"following\":\"finnian\",\"what\":[]}]",
      "required_auths": [],
      "required_posting_auths": [
        "johnnyt1991"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T22:36:00",
  "trx_id": "8caaee29cf00081a7321de25c32eef55150c32df",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25907221,
  "op": [
    "custom_json",
    {
      "id": "follow",
      "json": "[\"follow\",{\"follower\":\"johnnyt1991\",\"following\":\"finnian\",\"what\":[\"ignore\"]}]",
      "required_auths": [],
      "required_posting_auths": [
        "johnnyt1991"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T22:34:06",
  "trx_id": "db31956b3d5b33e1055dcb0a68679bf4929cd79a",
  "trx_in_block": 33,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25907216,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "Okay, at this point I'm only responding to your bullshit so that anyone who is watching this understands why you're wrong. I knew i shouldn't of wasted my time writing out actual arguments since  you obviously don't want to respond to them (and since you're obviously too fucking stupid to be able understand them) and just want to blindly assert your nonsense without backing it up with logic or evidence, use an appeal to popularity fallacy, ignore the fact that two people don't have to be equals (or close to it) to consent, and once again, ignore the reality of consent in terms of its ACTUAL requirements, which are, a desire to engage in an activity and the ability to intellectually understand that activity and it's potential consequences. \n\nIf a 14-year-old can consent to another 14-year-old, there is no reason they can't do so with anyone of any age, due to the fact that the individual possesses the abilities or requirements for sex.  Engaging with someone older doesn't automatically override those abilities; it will and can only happen if the older person ACTUALLY coerces the younger one with a SEPARATE coercive action. Stating otherwise is making a supernatural-like claim that is saying that the older person somehow negates the mental capabilities of the younger person just because they are older.\n\n\nTo finish up here, the first part of your post is just assuming that your conclusion is true and is supported in those contexts (evidence?), which is irrelevant to whether or not your conclusion is true and is the begging the question fallacy where you continue to assert your conclusion in your premises without actually supporting them with logic or evidence.\n\n''Most people do not though. They see those situations for what they are'' First, an Ad Populum or appeal to popularity fallacy, just because most people agree with a claim or assertion doesn't the claim or assertion true. Secondly and once again, you are implicitly assuming that your conclusion is true by saying that you and those other people see those situations ''for what they are''. You are stuck on the begging the question fallacy and also on a non-sequitur from up above since you think that two people being equal (or close to it) has any logical connection to their ability to consent to each other, again, if they both have the aforesaid requirements, they can both consent, even if they are not equals in intelligence or anything else. You are detached from reality and simply don't understand consent if you think otherwise.\n\n''You can write a wall of text if you want, but just say you disagree with the reasons'' Uh, no? This isn't a matter of opinion. All of your nonsense can easily be refuted and exposed with logic and actual THINKING. You would know this if you weren't a lazy clown that refuses to read and comprehend  5-7 paragraphs of text at a time.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t140656540z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t223349095z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T22:33:51",
  "trx_id": "90f9b96456587ac2c24773a85b11f0787ed673bc",
  "trx_in_block": 15,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25907199,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "No, children fondling themselves at that age (5) doesn't mean that they are experiencing sexual desire. First, it's biologically impossible for them to have those desires since they are not into puberty. Very young children like that may play with themselves like that (and with other children if they are playing ''doctor'') but that doesn't mean that they have a sexual desire to do so; they are curious about their bodies, but obviously, don't comprehend the nature of what they are doing (due to the fact above).\n\nYes, 9-year-olds can be in a state of puberty and I'm not going to completely discount the POSSIBILITY that they can consent, but I will say at that age, that it's a huge grey area (9-13 is, in my view) and would require scientific trials and studies that assess their mental capabilities. I stand by the reality of consent and it's requirements, which you haven't grasped yet.\n\n\n''Worse, it's pretty pathetic that a 25yo's only way to get sex is to prey on 14yo's. Do you think that's appropriate?''  LOL Why would you assume that that's the only way the 25yo can get sex? Did I imply that? (no) Do you actually believe that just because that person is engaging with someone of that age? Would you also believe that the 25yo could only get sex from a 30yo if had has sex with a person of that one age? You really should learn basic logic and critical thinking skills.\n\n\nI thought this was pretty obvious but YES, I have no problem with a 14-year-old having sex with someone of that age or of any fucking age because I actually understand what consent is, haven't seen any evidence that the average 14-year-old can't consent, and understand that if someone has the ability to consent to sex with a person of their own age, they have the ability to do it with anyone of any age as long as there isn't ACTUAL coercion involved. \n\nAny line that you draw will be arbitrary and a non-sequitur if both people involved have the ability to consent. The dynamic doesn't magically become coercive or harmful once the older person reaches a certain age (again, this is a supernatural-like claim) and if the younger one actually doesn't have the capacity to consent, someone will need to provide evidence for that claim, which will require them understanding this issue, unlike you.\n\nAt this point, it's pretty clear that ''the position of authority'' label is just that, a label with no substance behind it. Just because you slap that title on an interaction, it doesn't make it inherently coercive or harmful. It won't change reality or someone's mental state. This is a very stupid OPINION that is not based on anything except the fact that you keep asserting it over and over without supporting it with logic or evidence.\n\nLastly, I should have clarified the IQ thing by giving an example of someone with a 130 IQ and someone with a 100 IQ, obviously someone that gets low enough can't consent just like when someone gets low enough in age, but the method to assess an individual in that context will be the same. Someone who has an actual mental disability can very likely like the ability to consent, but it depends on if it's something like down syndrome or autism( which is on a spectrum).",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t141716344z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t223256918z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T22:33:00",
  "trx_id": "688931316bc24f287660147666d551549fa385c2",
  "trx_in_block": 6,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25907190,
  "op": [
    "custom_json",
    {
      "id": "follow",
      "json": "[\"follow\",{\"follower\":\"johnnyt1991\",\"following\":\"finnian\",\"what\":[]}]",
      "required_auths": [],
      "required_posting_auths": [
        "johnnyt1991"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T22:32:33",
  "trx_id": "c0224278a40c2158d3775695dc313b312e5c133f",
  "trx_in_block": 37,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25907141,
  "op": [
    "custom_json",
    {
      "id": "follow",
      "json": "[\"follow\",{\"follower\":\"johnnyt1991\",\"following\":\"finnian\",\"what\":[\"ignore\"]}]",
      "required_auths": [],
      "required_posting_auths": [
        "johnnyt1991"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T22:30:06",
  "trx_id": "1adb461ca0e8d2a0278fe4efe2bc3b2e4a53f038",
  "trx_in_block": 20,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25907138,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "Also, if you want to have someone to assert your nonsense at, you should tell Larken Rose about your ''position of authority'' retardation, especially since he agrees with me about this, even though he gets emotional about the issue, unlike me. Here is evidence that he supports my view.\n\nhttps://steemit.com/voluntaryism/@larkenrose/age-of-consent-part-three   Check the part where he talks about a 15yo dating a 25yo. Also, if you search for his post on facebook about the 3rd part of his age of consent series, you will notice a comment from a dad saying that he would basically lose his shit if a 40yo tried to get with his 13yo daughter.\n\nLarken then explains that consensual interaction between the two is ultimately based on HER mental ability or capacity and has nothing to do with an age gap. I'm sure old Larken would love to hear about your stupidity. Unfortunately, he won't logically destroy you like I did. By the way, you're blocked or ''muted''. Like I said, I have no desire to see any more of your idiocy.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"links\":[\"https://steemit.com/voluntaryism/@larkenrose/age-of-consent-part-three\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t142130036z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t222954467z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T22:29:57",
  "trx_id": "ffe4b46708add7be7bf0dfd320589c312095443a",
  "trx_in_block": 14,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25906935,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "If you actually fucking read what I wrote and addressed the actual arguments, you would know that you look stupid as fuck right now and that the logic you are using will also apply to the parent-child context (unless you can successfully special plead) since your logic states that there is a ''position of authority''  once a person is young enough and once an older person is a certain age, which can obviously occur in that context and can be an even greater ''position of authority'' due to the very likely massive age gap.  This will apply unless you can successfully special plead, which I will get into now.\n\nSecondly, since you are saying that your logic or rule doesn't apply to the parent-child context and that it only applies to a context that involves sex. So, you need to name the trait or quality that is unique to and present in sex that is relevant to the original argument or that produces the aforesaid ''position of authority'' and its possible practical consequences. This will obviously have to be absent in the parent-child context if you want to successfully special plead and be able to only apply that rule or logic to the former context, otherwise, it is a logical fallacy. \n\nObviously, there is not some special or exclusive quality about sex that produces your ''position of authority'' nonsense. The same label can be put on any supposed or assumed consensual activity between a parent and their child since the parent is very likely to be significantly older than their child and their child can also be at the same age where you start baselessly and arbitrarily worrying about them being too young, which would be at age 14.\n\nBy your logic, if a father is at the age of 40 and their son is 14, that is ''a position of authority'' and any supposed ''consensual'' interaction or activity between them can be called ''predatory'' or ''inappropriate''.  The requirements for actual consent are the same for any activity, including sex.  The same aforesaid practical consequence of ''being very easy to manipulate'' can also take place in any interaction between a parent and their child. Do you want to initiate force in order to ban these types of interactions? If so, you can use your position to justify using force on and banning all parents from engaging in activities with their children until they reach an arbitrary age. You also can't truly call yourself a voluntaryist if you hold this position. Overall, you just sound morally dumbfounded (look it up) about the idea of 14yo having sex with a 25yo, but obviously can't give any good arguments for being against it.\n\nFor the last part of your idiocy, there is no evidence that someone before pre-pubescence is actually having sexual desires and once again, the fact that they are playing with themselves doesn't lead to that conclusion (learn basic biology).  The last sentence is just you straw-manning (another logical fallacy) me since I never said that sexual desires are the only requirement and I never said that it should be solely based off someone saying ''yes''.\n\nSo, thank you for not responding to any of my actual arguments or even reading most of what I wrote (are you afraid to?), thank you for all of the logical fallacies, and thank you for the attempts to reduce your arguments to absurdity. Due to all of those things (and more) I have no desire to waste any more of my time on you and I also have no desire to see any more of your retarded, non sequitur, assertions about ''position of authority''. People like you are the reason I have so much disrespect for a lot (probably most) of the people in the so-called anarchist and voluntaryist community. The only thing people like you can do is bitch about the government. You have no understand of basic logic or philosophy and whenever this issue, or any issue that requires actual thinking comes up, you people quickly show how fucking stupid you really are and how low the bar is for entry into the anarchist or voluntaryist community.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t142130036z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t221943767z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T22:19:48",
  "trx_id": "3d7a1d547411327767e1f1b16e5f81f75cc28d86",
  "trx_in_block": 3,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25904047,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t140656540z",
      "voter": "johnnyt1991",
      "weight": 0
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T19:55:21",
  "trx_id": "5c1a784354f2b287c75ed6f705ba059c04c817da",
  "trx_in_block": 39,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25904044,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t140656540z",
      "voter": "johnnyt1991",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T19:55:12",
  "trx_id": "97b366daf6eb3a907bfe0b9490cb533113097fd9",
  "trx_in_block": 39,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25897501,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "body": "@@ -93,16 +93,244 @@\n  their children.\n+%0A%0AWorse, as I already replied, children can have sexual desires way before they are sexually matured.  You attempting to use that as your line is disgusting.  It cannot simply be based off the child saying %22yes%22 to a sexual act.\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t142130036z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T14:28:00",
  "trx_id": "8f8986e600d75029a329d2ebf426ae9cc54f0f69",
  "trx_in_block": 20,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25897395,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "body": "@@ -105,52 +105,4 @@\n ren.\n-  What the fuck are you?  I think you're insane.\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t142130036z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T14:22:42",
  "trx_id": "e9de4619f846108e53317756277cda96cf0d5e4c",
  "trx_in_block": 11,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25897388,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "body": "@@ -45,8 +45,112 @@\n hildren.\n+  Parents are not sexually involved with their children.  What the fuck are you?  I think you're insane.\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t142130036z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T14:22:21",
  "trx_id": "dba5b38321c38279d806adf63a4f631ab016896e",
  "trx_in_block": 6,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25897371,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "body": "This has nothing to do with parents having children.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t142130036z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T14:21:30",
  "trx_id": "4d92978a33577945a69da89ba5116e6bafd61aae",
  "trx_in_block": 9,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25897287,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "body": "Children have been known to masturbate as young as 5yo.  That shows sexual desire.  Girls can get their periods as early as 9yo.  Based on what you've written then, a 9yo could consent?  Worse, it's pretty pathetic that a 25yo's only way to get sex is to prey on 14yo's.  Do you think that's appropriate?\n\nAnswer the question please.  You have no problem with a 25yo guy having sex with a 14yo girl???\n\nThe line cannot be exact as you already know because of 15yo and 16yo's having consensual sex.  A 17yo and a 20yo is pretty vague too.  Why I engaged you is because of the large age gaps and the young age of the one person involved.  That's the issue I have.  When the one person is very young, and the other is much much older, it creates the position of authority issue I've already mentioned.\n\nYes, differences in IQ matter as you suggested.  A good example is a local deputy that was arrested for sexually molesting a mentally challenged family member of his.  The low IQ younger girl could not have possibly consented, and the law appropriately took action.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t083003007z",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t141716344z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T14:17:18",
  "trx_id": "a5b4c6826c35d682d0f3d6d1d0de50f8e46a7a8a",
  "trx_in_block": 14,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25897080,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "body": "There are reasons the military bars officers from having sexual relationships with enlisted.  There are reasons bosses are not supposed to have sexual relationships with their employees.  You can write a wall of text if you want, but just say you disagree with the reasons.  Most people do not though.  They see those situations for what they are.  It is inappropriate not because any law says it is.  It is inappropriate because the two people involved are not equals.  A 14yo is not even close to an equal to a 25yo.  Change the ages to 25 and 34 though, and it is a completely different situation.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t080028541z",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t140656540z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T14:06:57",
  "trx_id": "743d47e43d8316ab0545c5963d8340b4372be032",
  "trx_in_block": 9,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25891347,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -761,8 +761,87 @@\n  plead).\n+%0A%0AIf you think I have misrepresented your position, explain how I have done so.\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T09:20:03",
  "trx_id": "ffd0839f4688b4613cd44b466d95d65717186a1e",
  "trx_in_block": 29,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25891205,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -630,17 +630,16 @@\n urdum on\n-,\n  since i\n@@ -716,17 +716,16 @@\n ications\n-.\n  (unless\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T09:12:57",
  "trx_id": "25358be62f5788e261f75b377494c287e631b1e6",
  "trx_in_block": 22,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25891187,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -677,17 +677,53 @@\n ion \n-logically\n+through your argument's logical implications.\n  (un\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T09:12:03",
  "trx_id": "219da455845867a00b887206442a873383ef16e1",
  "trx_in_block": 11,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25891161,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -292,86 +292,8 @@\n ce. \n-You also seem to think that they necessarily produce coercion or manipulation.\n   Yo\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T09:10:45",
  "trx_id": "88096d9f97dbe570434e44f597485afc39174b75",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25891134,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -205,16 +205,97 @@\n and will\n+, even when there isn't any evidence of any actual coercive behavior taking place\n . You al\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T09:09:24",
  "trx_id": "cb4136639b1d408c15df2d8b5532b92f9c67da5c",
  "trx_in_block": 22,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25891050,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "In short, you don't understand what consent is and think that abstractions like social roles, norms, or views necessarily negate someone's ability to engage in that mental process within their own desire and will. You also seem to think that they necessarily produce coercion or manipulation.  Your arguments contain claims that require evidence and the logic you use can be used to justify banning all parent's from having children (I assume you want to ban all of the aforesaid ''predatory'' interactions entirely), which will obviously cause the human race to go extinct. Your position is an easy one to use Ad Reductio Absurdum on, since it leads to that absurd conclusion logically (unless you can successfully special plead).",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t090508948z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T09:05:12",
  "trx_id": "4a264ecf130657401d5c2d6808724f4992f132c8",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25890773,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -2614,76 +2614,4 @@\n nse.\n- Good luck with your position, you have a lot to learn about this issue.\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t083003007z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T08:51:21",
  "trx_id": "dc4bc63c0f9fb73a3bd80df9927d7f11477e2999",
  "trx_in_block": 10,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25890676,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -3519,16 +3519,17 @@\n ionships\n+,\n  you wil\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t080028541z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T08:46:30",
  "trx_id": "904032f1f2e6d58434d269385885407459b14f47",
  "trx_in_block": 20,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25890628,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -3185,20 +3185,27 @@\n used to \n-call\n+assume that\n  all of \n@@ -3285,30 +3285,20 @@\n and \n-a\n+their\n  child \n-(less than 18)\n  coe\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t080028541z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T08:44:06",
  "trx_id": "65523b90ffa3939b97ad906643c66f6d5c229570",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25890540,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -1297,20 +1297,18 @@\n eople.  \n-They\n+It\n  obvious\n@@ -1408,16 +1408,17 @@\n uarantee\n+,\n  despite\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t080028541z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T08:39:42",
  "trx_id": "39cee251df66f362ff77b9006bb5dfb1488e96da",
  "trx_in_block": 18,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25890499,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -1117,18 +1117,18 @@\n ority'' \n-in\n+of\n  that fo\n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t080028541z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T08:37:39",
  "trx_id": "dc0d4e48bdd93f9b2225dc08add41675a12aeec1",
  "trx_in_block": 4,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25890474,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "@@ -940,34 +940,43 @@\n not \n-w\n+t\n hat \n-I'm about to say with\n+type of ''authority'', it will\n  mor\n@@ -999,15 +999,22 @@\n ply \n-to that\n+any other type\n  as \n",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t080028541z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T08:36:24",
  "trx_id": "154e010aa7b66be8dd3655fc2f07bb74c58a6590",
  "trx_in_block": 13,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25890348,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "Now, to address the latter part of that rebuttal where you say '' It is very easy for the older person to manipulate the younger one''. Again, this contradicts the previous statement you made that states that the relationship CANNOT be considered consensual.  Just because something bad can EASILY happen, doesn't mean that it will, obviously. So, if you think that we shouldn't allow these kinds of interactions just because something bad can easily happen, I can use that same logic and say that we shouldn't allow anyone to have children since manipulation can very VERY easily occur between a parent and a child since a parent has MUCH more power or ''authority'' than the child in every single way.\n\n\nYou can also apply this logic to other sexual/romantic relationships and say that someone with a significantly higher IQ can easily manipulate a person with a significantly lower IQ or that someone who is emotionally stoic can easily manipulate someone who is very emotional. \n\n\n\nThere is also a big difference between something that can easily happen and something that is likely to happen. For example, a parent could EASILY kill their newborn baby, but does that mean that someone is LIKELY to do that? Saying that it's likely to happen, depends on the individual and requires evidence about that person's character and past behavior. \n\nAs for the last question, the only ''hard-line'' I draw is at pre-pubescence since those people have no sex drive and no interest in consenting. Like I said, the requirements for consent are desire (a sex drive for sex) and an intellectual understanding of the activity and its possible consequences. Once we go on pre-pubescence we have to rely on inductive evidence and try to get the strongest possible through the observation (preferably done by unbiased psychologists) of an individual's body language, communication lucidity, and even a test about sex after education is done for it.  That's a brief summary, but if you really want more explanation, you will have to read the last 5 paragraphs under the '' THE GOVERNMENT'S CLAIMS AND THE ARGUMENTS BASED ON THEM'' section. I'm not writing it all out again and I doubt that you would read it all anyway.  \n\n\nBy the way, where is your ''line'' when it comes to age gaps? You said a 14-year-old and 25-year-old is automatically ''predatory'' (is a father engaging in a supposedly ''consensual'' activity with his 14-year-old son also ''predatory''?). I guarantee you that the line you draw will be arbitrary, completely devoid of evidence, and will have absurd logical implications, just like the government nonsense. Good luck with your position, you have a lot to learn about this issue.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t083003007z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T08:30:06",
  "trx_id": "0b43b24b5346f6a4277d533356cb560b4924554f",
  "trx_in_block": 13,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25889757,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "''The older person is in a position of authority over the younger person. The same principle applies to work place and other sexual harassment offenses.\n\nWhen you have power over someone like a priest does over their worshipers or a boss does over their employees or an adult does over a child, the relationship cannot be said to be fully consensual. They are not equals. It is very easy for the older person to manipulate the younger.''\n\n\n\nI actually did address this under the ''Power differential'' section but I didn't address a specific case like this. Just to clarify, when I speak about ''power differentials'', I am talking about any type of imbalance between the older and younger person, whether that be physical size, intelligence, social roles, emotional equalization, etc.  In the rebuttal you laid out it seems that the ''authority'' you are talking about is the type that is based on social roles, views, and norms. If it's not what I'm about to say with more than likely apply to that as well, but you can still clarify if you want.\n\n\nThe first issue with your argument is that ''authority'' in that form, is something that doesn't necessarily manifest as harmful or coercive physical actions or behavior since it is ultimately the views or mindset of a group of people.  They obviously can if the older person decides to act in a coercive or violent manner, but that isn't a guarantee despite what you seem to believe (at least in the first part of this rebuttal, since you say that it is ''very easy to manipulate'' later on, which implies that it isn't a guarantee).\n\n Also, that ''Authority'' doesn't guarantee that the younger person can't consent. If you claim that it does, you are committing the non-sequitur fallacy since those two things are not logically connected. As I explained in the OP, the only requirements for consent are a desire to engage in an activity,  the ability to intellectually understand the activity that you wish to engage in, and the potential consequences of that activity. Obviously, that ''authority'' has no bearing on or connection to this, unless the older person actually coerces the younger person with ACTUAL behavior or action.\n\n\n \n\nThere are more absurd logical implications that follow from those positions that I went over in the OP, but I'll do it again. Again, the first one comes from the fact that you seem to be assuming (again, in the first part of your rebuttal where you say that the relationship cannot be said to be fully consensual) that coercion or manipulation is GUARANTEED to occur from the older person just because the older person has that type of ''authority'' over the younger one.  This is a claim that will require evidence that the older person has in fact performed a coercive behavior or action towards the younger one, otherwise, you are just making a baseless accusation and look like a paranoid schizophrenic like most people who claim this.\n\n\nIf you want to continue to assert that it necessarily occurs due to the presence of that  type of ''authority'' again, it is ultimately a claim that has to be backed up with evidence, but it is also an argument and logic that could be used to call all of the interactions and supposed ''consensual'' activities between a parent and a child (less than 18) coercive or non-consensual since that type of ''authority'' exists in that dynamic as well (and to a greater extent). \n\nIf you want to try and say that your logic or that rule only applies to certain contexts or relationships you will have to name a relevant and non-arbitrary difference between the parent-child context and the context that you are wishing to apply that rule to, otherwise it is a special pleading fallacy. \nIf you want to say it only applies to a context where sex is involved, name the characteristic or a trait of sex that is relevant to the original argument or that guarantees the manifestation of coercion from the older person.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "finnian",
      "parent_permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "permlink": "re-finnian-re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180912t080028541z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-12T08:00:33",
  "trx_id": "692f2031e6eeb5ad3d1a14f99b1d3e7808676f95",
  "trx_in_block": 3,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25875413,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "finnian",
      "body": "TL;DR (most of it)\n\nYou'd be better off cutting these up into smaller posts perhaps? \n\nMost people who are against what you're promoting are not, obviously, complaining about a 17yo and an 18yo having consensual sex.  Hell, I had sex with my first girl friend when we were both under 16, and according to the law where we were and at the time we \"raped\" each other.  Laws like those are indeed absurd.\n\nMost people I know are not arguing against those things.  What I am arguing against is when a 14yo ends up having consensual sex with a 25yo.  What is my problem with that specific scenario?  It's very simple, and you failed to ever mention it (unless I skimmed poorly which is a possibility).\n\nMy problem is that the older person in that situation is automatically a predator regardless of what the government's current laws state.  Why? The older person is in a position of authority over the younger person.  The same principle applies to work place and other sexual harassment offenses.  \n\nWhen you have power over someone like a priest does over their worshipers or a boss does over their employees or an adult does over a child, the relationship cannot be said to be fully consensual.  They are not equals.   It is very easy for the older person to manipulate the younger.\n\nI'd love to hear your opinion on that issue.  Also, please tell me how young you think sex would be okay regardless of the age of the older person.  Is it 13? When they first bleed?  Do you have any line at all, or is it simply up to the 9 year old to say they consent?",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\"}",
      "parent_author": "johnnyt1991",
      "parent_permlink": "refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition",
      "permlink": "re-johnnyt1991-refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition-20180911t200315345z",
      "title": ""
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-11T20:03:15",
  "trx_id": "c3efaa0f2753365a03965074a14dc00b8ff6d826",
  "trx_in_block": 31,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25870394,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition",
      "voter": "moby-dick",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-11T15:52:18",
  "trx_id": "8f42f455032d5cb5c6ab8530a34b776eba30bc7b",
  "trx_in_block": 31,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25864432,
  "op": [
    "vote",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "permlink": "refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition",
      "voter": "sensation",
      "weight": 10000
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-11T10:54:09",
  "trx_id": "5cb773ae8c1250ffebc912bc23c01fe573ea0aec",
  "trx_in_block": 2,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25862535,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "29307.056171 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-11T09:19:15",
  "trx_id": "c320488535ca845cc99765e893375969bfea4119",
  "trx_in_block": 74,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 25862457,
  "op": [
    "comment",
    {
      "author": "johnnyt1991",
      "body": "Back in November of last year, I made two posts about most of the age of consent arguments that people spew out and also refuted them (in a dissatisfactory manner, according to myself). Since then, I have thought through all of those arguments (and a few more) and have found even more absurdities and errors within them and I have also thought of new ways to refute them. In addition, I personally found my refutations and explanations to be unclear and incomplete, which is why I have chosen to write one more article on the issue that will go over the same arguments (and a few more) and claims again but will do it in a more clear, concise, and logically destructive manner. \n\n\nBefore I get into the arguments themselves, I want to expose and explain the method of argumentation that I will be using very frequently throughout this post. This is a form of argument known as ''Reductio Ad Absurdum'' or ''Argumentum Ad Absurdum'', which are both latin for ''Reduction to the Absurd'' and ''Argument to Absurdity''.  A lot of people use this argument but do so unconsciously, which leads to the negative consequences of them never fully taking advantage of it and to them never being able to easily refute blatantly retarded arguments (like the vast majority of the age of consent ones). \n\n\nA common example of this argument (and one that people frequently use) would be the reply person A gives to person B after person A claims that they should be able to do X since everyone else is doing it. For example, someone claims that they should smoke weed because all of their friends are doing it. The other person's ad reductio argument  would be ''If all of your friends jumped off a bridge should you too?'' The first person is probably inconsistent in their position due to the fact that they probably wouldn't think that they should jump off a bridge just because their friends do it. If they are consistent, this position still leads to practical and moral absurdity (assuming the person's moral system isn't compatible with such a position) since an individual should perform ANY action (murder, theft, child rape, etc.) as long as their friends are doing it.\n\n\nBefore I move on, I want to talk about the most common error people make when responding to an ad reductio argument. They will falsely accuse you of COMPARING two actions, such as murder and jumping off a bridge (to use the example above). Ad Reductio Absurdum is never about comparing two actions or things, it is about pointing out the logical implications and extensions of a position and exposing them as absurd through uncovering contradictions, inconsistencies, or blatant practical absurdities. People usually do this when they found out that their position could be used to argue for and justify an action like murder, rape or another action that is widely regarded as immoral/ethical. It's just a response from cognitive dissonance and is devoid of proper understanding.\n\n\n\n\nThe last thing that I want to do before I get into the arguments themselves is have a small rant (it could easily be much longer) about how I feel about this issue and how I feel about the vast majority of the people who ''try'' to talk about or even ''decide'' this issue. First, I don't get emotional about this issue ( or anything that can manifest from it) whatsoever. I find this issue to be just as ''upsetting'' or rage inducing as taking a piss in the toilet. However, what I do find EXTREMELY upsetting or rage inducing is the fact that the vast majority of the fucking people who try to speak about this have the emotional maturity of a 2-year-old and have ABSOLUTELY NO understanding of logic or critical thinking; not to mention the various psychological biases and barriers. \n\n\nThe group of people that piss me off the most are the ones that truly believe that they are anarchists, voluntaryists, or libertarians and then proceed to try and argue their retarded views using GOVERNMENT terminology and arguments that are based on what the government and it's ''laws'' has said about this issue, which is all arbitrary nonsense that doesn't even have actual claims behind it (more on this later). How fucking clueless and oblivious to reality can you be?  This is one of the main reasons why the so-called anarchist/voluntaryist community is a complete fraudulent fucking clown show that doesn't even exist. \n\n\nI'm not writing this for the aforesaid retards that have next to no hope of ever breaking out of their emotional prison and actually admitting that their wrong and that they have been duped by the government, the people around them, and by themselves, most of all; I'm writing this for everyone who is an actual anarchist, voluntaryist, or libertarian. I don't give a rat's fucking ass about your pathetic little fucking feelings or about your deluded and retarded fantasies about ''protecting the children'', especially when those fantasies lead to people getting thrown in a cage over victimless crimes.  Lastly, I don't give a  fuck how many times your daddy (or whoever) raped or molested you and how traumatized you are when you are falsely accusing people of being pedophiles and sexual predators and are also helping ruin people's lives with those accusations.\n\n\nIf anything I said about upsets you to the point where you can't think logically about what I'm about to go over, get the fuck off my page. I'm not here to placate or appeal to the emotions of emotionally immature and/or traumatized retards who want to project their trauma onto other people and make up slanderous shit up afterward (These people deserve ABSOLUTELY no respect).  I'm all about truth, logic, and reality if you want your emotions appealed to go tell someone who actually gives two fucks. I could go on and on about the aforesaid sacks of shit, but that will be for another post. Now for the actual arguments.\n\n\n\n \n\nTHE GOVERNMENT'S CLAIMS AND THE ARGUMENTS BASED ON THEM\n\n\nThe people who are actually anarchists and voluntaryists will obviously reject every single government ''law'' and all of the terminology that is attached to them, but it's still important to understand all of the logical fallacies and absurdities that will inevitably follow from using government-based arguments. For starters, all of the claims that are made by the government are claims that are being made by other human beings and like all claims, they must be backed up by evidence or strong argumentation at the very least. Obviously, simply asserting claims over and over or making up unique terminology and/or definitions and asserting them over and over does not constitute an argument or objective truth. In the case of this topic, giving the word ''minor'' a unique definition and ascribing it to someone does not manipulate or alter physical or actual reality whatsoever. In order for that to have any basis in reality beyond language or communication, there must be evidence presented that supports the claim that is behind that terminology or definition.\n\n\nThe claims that are presented (the government's claims) behind that term are ones that state someone under a certain age can't ''legally'' consent to certain activities and that someone under a certain age is ''legally'' considered a ''child''.  First, the term ''legally'' or ''legal'', in this context, are terms that are assumed to have inherent legitimacy, due to the fact that the people who first assert them are assumed to have inherent ''authority'' or legitimacy. They are also repeatedly asserted and that are used to try and justify the prohibition or the allowing of certain behaviors by individuals that either commit the appeal to authority fallacy, appeal to the majority fallacy, or the ad baculum (appeal to force) fallacy when they attempt to use that terminology as an argument (anarchists and voluntaryists should know this). However, those fallacies come after another fallacy, which is begging the question or when someone assumes their conclusion and it's veracity in their premises without supporting their premise or premises with evidence or logical support.\n\n\nThe government and all of its supporters commit this fallacy (and all of the following aforementioned fallacies afterward) whenever they assert the aforesaid (and any other ''legal'' or ''illegal'' claim) claims and arguments since their premise (government or the people calling themselves that are inherently legitimate or have inherent truth in their claims) is not supported and can't be, logically speaking. Therefore, any of the ''legal'' age of consent claims and laws (and any other  laws) are based on a false premise.\n\n\nNow, we can go on to the claims that other people make about the age of consent laws and the laws that are related to that. The arguments other people make about these laws have to do with people's actual mental capability and capacity, unlike the government's claims, which are baseless assertions that don't make any claims about people actual mental ability (research the history of the age of consent laws to verify this).  First of all, when people talk about consent they almost always use the fallacious and unfounded ''legal'' version of it, which obviously leads absolutely nowhere except into the realm of delusion and illogic. When it comes to actual consent, it's true nature, and requirements, most people come nowhere close to addressing it, especially when discussing this issue.\n\n\nActual consent is a mental process that only requires desire and the capacity to understand the particular activity that is being desired for. For example, if someone wants to engage in the game of basketball, they simply need a desire to participate and the mental capacity to comprehend information about that activity (and obviously the physical capacity to play as well). This is true of every single other activity, including sex. There is not a magical or superhuman requirement that someone must have in order to consent to sex, regardless of what many mentally handicapped individuals believe. Sex is a very primitive and base desire that has been around since the days of cavemen, which means engagement in it doesn't require very much mental capacity AT ALL. However, the modern puritanic mindset would lead you to believe that it requires you to be superhuman, at least if you don't have the label ''adult'' ascribed to you by the government.\n\n\nWhen it comes to any claim that is actually questioning a person's mental ability, there obviously has to be evidence provided, but people don't understand what that would look like in the context of this issue (mainly because they are using the government's version of consent). The first thing people need to understand is the difference between deductive and inductive evidence. The deductive evidence is evidence that presents a definitive and concrete answer or conclusion. The inductive evidence is evidence that presents a probabilistic or likely answer or conclusion. It's impossible to provide deductive evidence for consent or lack-there-of due to the fact that is a very specific mental process that would obviously a very detailed reading of someone's brain and would require wild advancements in neuroscience.\n\n\nThat obviously means that the evidence would have to be inductive and would be specifically for someone's ability to consent or for someone's inability to consent. At this point, the vast majority of people will be completely lost and will pull random numbers out of their ass (probably 18) and think that they are presenting an actual argument like they always do. One of the claims people make is that 18 years of age is the cutoff point and that a 17-year-old is suddenly incapable of consent. Is there any evidence of this on any level? If we take an average 18-year-old and an average 17-year-old with no significant IQ difference and study their body language, speech, and lucidity in terms of their overall communication, will there be any significant difference or significant signs that the younger ones has considerably less mental capacity than the older one? We can also give each of them a test about sex and see if the younger one does significantly worse (this will obviously need to be repeated many times with different people in order for it to be considered strong evidence).\n\n\nThe reason why this is a good way to gain inductive evidence for someone's ability or inability to consent is because of the fact that someone's body language and lucid ( or lack-there-of) communication are the things that are closest to the deductive point (being someone'brain or mind) and because of the fact that gauging someone's ability through other means (through a separate non-related activity) will be farther from the deductive point, which mean it will be weaker inductive evidence. As I said above, this will have to be repeated with many different individuals and should ideally be done by objective and non-biased psychologists in a scientific setting\\study, but it can obviously be done by an objective individual in regular situations. This same process can be done for any other activity and for determining if an individual can or cannot consent to a specific activity.\n\n\nSo, is there any evidence for the aforesaid claim? I certainly haven't seen any and the people who make the claim certainly haven't presented any. You can use the same process for claims about any other age groups that people make baseless claims about (14,15,16,17, etc.). Aside from people who are pre-pubescent (they don't have a sex drive so they don't have a desire to consent) or strongly mentally disabled, I don't see any strong evidence (deductive or otherwise) for anyone's inability to consent to sex, only the emotional retardation of people who probably shouldn't even be alive (no that's not a threat).\n\n\n\n\nTHE APPEALING TO ''CHILD'' ARGUMENT\n\n\nThis is the argument (if you can call it that) that says that someone is unable to consent and that someone is a ''pedophile'' for being sexually attracted to such an individual because they have the word ''child'' ascribed to them. First, the people who make this argument are appealing to the government's version or definition of the word ''child'', which is obviously based on nothing except the word of the people behind the label ''government''.  It is also inconsistent since the law known as the ''age of majority'' (the age where someone is ''legally'' an adult) is not 18 in all of the states and is not 18 in other parts of the world as well.  This is an easy argument to use ad reductio absurdum on  since you can just point out that someone is considered a ''child'' in Mississipi until they are 21, so if someone moves to that state they are magically unable to consent and if someone is sexually attracted to that person they are magically pedophile, even though they wouldn't be if they were in the previous geographical area or state. By the way, ignoring exceptions to a general rule is known as the Accident fallacy.\n\n\nThe same goes for Alabama, a few other states, and many areas of Canada where the ''Age of Majority'' is 19.  Now to address the ''child'' thing in terms of actual consent, it is a begging the question fallacy since it assumes the conclusion (Individuals with the word child attached to them can't consent) in the premise without supporting it with any evidence that actually shows that the individual with that word ascribed to them doesn't have the mental capacity to consent. It's the same type of flawed thinking that people used when they said that women couldn't vote. That conclusion was assumed to be true based on the fact that those people had the word ''woman'' attached to them instead of ''man'', not that they didn't actually have to mental capacity to comprehend politics. The same flawed logic is used now but between ''child'' and ''adult''.\n\n\nAs for the ''pedophile'' thing,  for starters, a lot of people who say this stupid shit are pretty much calling themselves one as well due to the fact that 17 year old don't have a radical or even noticeable (especially with clothes on) body change when they suddenly turn 18, just like they don't have a radical mental change. This means if someone is sexually attracted to the body type of the average18-year-old, they will also be attracted to everyone else who has that same body type, especially in terms of their secondary sexual characteristics AKA their ass, breasts, chest, shoulder width, etc. These retards are too detached from reality to realize that the average 17-year-old will look identical to the average 18-year-old in terms of their body size, especially if they see them out in public with clothes on.  Then there is the fact that people who are even younger can have larger and more prominent secondary sexual characteristics than people in their 20's, even though they aren't fully developed. There is also the fact that a lot of the fucking idiots are attracted to a very popular section of porn called ''petite teens'' or ''tiny teens'' who are 18 but have the body size of the average 13 or 14-year-old. These fucking retards truly believe pedophilia is about a number or the word ''child''. There is a reason why the original definition of pedophilia is ''attraction to pre-pubescent children''. If you don't want to look like a total fucking idiot at least try to use the the terms hebophilia and ephebophilia. You might want to open up a book on basic biology and learn that being sexually attracted to beings that can reproduce is the exact opposite of mental illness.\n\n\n\n\nTHE POWER DIFFERENTIAL ARGUMENT\n\n\nThis is another easy argument to use ad reductio on since it assumes the manifestation of coercion or harm based on abstractions that aren't necessarily acted upon. It's also a good way to expose logical implications most people won't agree on, which will leave them with a contradiction or inconsistency in their position. The argument states that a sexual encounter between an older person and younger person is inherently unethical, coercive, harmful, and that the younger person can't consent. First, there is an implicit special pleading fallacy in here since the argument implies that only a sexual encounter is harmful. In order for it not to be this fallacy, someone has to name the trait that is present in sex or sexual activity that is relevant to the original argument and that is not present in any other activity. So someone would have to name a trait that is relevant to a power differential and that is exclusive to sexual activity, which can't be done without going off on a non-sequitur that has nothing to do with consent or power differentials.\n\n\nThe ad reductio for this position is exposing the logical implications and extensions of it and showing that this logic would mean that all parent-child activities are inherently harmful, unethical, coercive, and that parent's child can't consent to any activity with him or her due to the power differential (the largest one of any relationship too). This also applies to any other relationship with a power differential, which would probably be most. Even if someone is consistent with this position and bites the bullet on the aforesaid implications, it is still blatantly absurd because a power differential isn't an inherently harmful thing. For that to be the case, it would require a separate harmful or coercive action in order for any type of negative physical or mental effect to manifest. Yes, this remains true regardless of how large the age gap is (15-yr-old and 70-year-old). If you are going to accuse someone of coercion or predation, provide evidence of that or evidence that shows one or both of the people can't consent if you are going to make that claim. Otherwise, it will end up being the absurd argument above.\n\n\n\n\nTHE RESPONSIBILITY AND BRAIN DEVELOPMENT ARGUMENT\n\n\nBelieve it or not, this argument is a complete non-sequitur and doesn't actually have anything to do with someone's ability to consent. This is because consent only requires the ability to conceptualize, comprehend, or understand information. Whether or not someone actually thinks through that information, weighs the pros and cons of an action, and ultimately makes a good decision on it, is irrelevant to consent.  The pre-frontal cortex is about impulse control, emotional regulation, and good decision making. These things aren't required for consent and in any other context besides the ones that have something to do with a person below 18 or 25, no one seems to care. Obviously, people of all ages make impulsive and irresponsible decisions when it comes to sex and many others things, despite their brain being fully developed. In short, if you are going to argue for prohibiting teenagers or people in their early 20's from being able to consent to sex because they make bad choices or are less capable than an older person, the logical implications are prohibiting anyone who makes or has made bad choices and anyone who is less capable of making good choices (below average IQ). I'll re-post the section about brain development from my past posts since it still has many good points, but a lot of it is unnecessary since the effects of having an underdeveloped pre-frontal cortex aren't relevant to consent.\n\n\n''They can't consent because their brain isn't fully developed'' This is usually how this argument is made and I'm going to go into pretty deep detail in order to fully expose the ridiculousness of this argument. When people talk about someone's brain not being fully developed they are referring to a specific part of the brain called the pre-frontal cortex, which is the part of the brain that is responsible for supporting things like strong impulse control and long-term decision making. The one thing people should understand is that something like IQ or general intelligence is separate from this and that someone can still be highly intellectual/intelligent, even more so than an older fully developed person, and still have an underdeveloped pre-frontal cortex (that's how child geniuses exist).\n\nAnother thing that is important to understand is that just because someone's pre-frontal cortex isn't fully developed, doesn't mean that they are completely incapable or don't have the capacity to make good choices or that they can't control their impulses. This seems to be a common myth among certain people that love to make this argument but it's obviously false once you realize that if that were true there would be chaos everywhere by everyone under the ages of 23-25. Human behavior and psychology is obviously far more complicated than this, especially when you look at the overall output of behavior from people in their 30's, 40's, and even older. Many of these people act far more irresponsible, impulsively, and immaturely than people in their early 20's and even a lot of teenagers (probably most).\n\nWhy do they act that way if their brain is supposedly fully developed? The details are complicated and even unknown in a lot of cases but when you look and learn about the environments these types of people grow up in and often stay in through their whole life, it's pretty obvious. Growing up in an environment that is both poor economically and morally speaking, contains violence both in the household and the neighborhood, contains hard street drugs, has street gangs roaming around nearby, and has the majority of the population in that community behaving just as poorly as the individual will when they grow up in an environment like this, will more than likely produce a completely dysfunctional person that will miss out on the positive effects of a fully developed brain either because of brain damage, arrested brain developed, or the effects being overridden by social conditioning from their environment.\n\nNow that that's out of the way, now we can get into the actual argument. So can someone with an underdeveloped brain consent to sex or anything else? Well, if you haven't figured it out yet, the most important thing to look at when trying to determine that, are the actual practical effects or consequences (or lack-there-of) that are presented through someone's overall behavior and actions. Obviously, this is the important thing here and just spewing out incomplete arguments like ''their brain isn't fully developed'' goes nowhere and requires another premise that is about the actual consequences or effects of that condition. Saying ''their brain isn't fully developed'' is like says someone is drunk but not assessing the effects or severity of that state by examining the effects that are being externalized through someone's body language and speech. Just like with brain development, it's not a black and white thing since someone can still consent if they are in what you might call ''stage 1'' of being drink (impulsive and hyper) as opposed to later stages where they can't stand up straight, have slurred and unclear speech, and may even be passed out on the floor.\n\nAnyway, let's say we have someone who isn't going to have a fully developed brain until 25 but they are an average 24-year-old who comes from a healthy environment right now. If we take that person and then take an average 25-year-old who also comes from a healthy environment and is fully developed, and observe their overall behavior in terms of their choices and actions, are we going to see any major differences? Well, I'm not sure since there haven't been any studies on this, but according to the geniuses that make the aforesaid argument, the 24-year-old can't consent but they need evidence to back this up and saying ''their brain isn't fully developed'' isn't evidence of their lack of ability to consent it is evidence their brain matter isn't as large as the 25-year-old. As a quick side note, if someone is going to make the argument that a person with an underdeveloped brain can't consent to sex with someone with a fully developed brain, it will lead to the same absurdity that I went over under the ''Power Differential'' section and as an addition to that, it will also mean that someone with a 100 IQ can't consent to someone with a 99 IQ since the lower IQ person is technically less intelligence and is unable to make good choices as well as the higher IQ individual.\n\nIn terms of the quality of the evidence or proof that is needed, deductively speaking, it's impossible to prove that ANYONE can or cannot due to the fact that technology in the field of neuroscience isn't even close to being at the point where it can provide a detailed analyzes of someone's brain and definitively prove what a person can or can't comprehend on a cognitive/intellectual level. In terms of inductive evidence, which is what we have to go with, it obviously needs to be as strong as it possibly can, which means accurately ascertaining the quality of people's behavior is paramount. The second thing that is paramount after that is understanding the logical consequences or implications of making the judgment that certain individuals can't consent.\n\nFor example, saying that it's reasonable to assume that someone can't consent because they immature or are making poor choices in their life on a financial and personal level, will mean that many people (not just young underdeveloped people) will have to have their freedom taken away if we wish to be logically consistent. This obviously doesn't just apply to young people who aren't fully developed but will also apply to the types of people I wrote about near the beginning of this section and probably many other people in the general population. From a voluntaryist perspective, this is a complete absurdity, a deplorable position to hold, and not an argument we want to standby.\n\n Before I end this, I would like to go back to the hypothetical I gave about the 24 and 25-year-olds so I can finish refuting the original argument. If it is true or at least reasonable to assume that someone can't consent if their brain isn't fully developed, then the overall behavior of someone who isn't fully developed and someone who is should be drastically and noticeably different. Has there ever been any strong evidence towards that of any kind? No, and linking studies that are done about the pre-frontal cortex not being fully developed aren't evidence because those studies aren't about the specific effects (or how severe they are) of having an underdeveloped brain at certain ages or whether or not someone can still consent to certain activities or not. They don't even have the word ''consent'' in them.\n\nYes, I realize that brain development and human development overall is a continuum, but the reason I'm only going one year below the fully developed mark is because that is all that it takes to refute an absolutist argument like that. I have actually addressed other ages below that when I was rambling about earlier about people being brought up in certain environments and the logical consequences of saying people who are immature and make bad life choices.\n\n\n\nGASLIGHTING\n\n\nThis is about the claim of ''This person can't consent to sex because they aren't emotionally ready''. All I will say is PROVIDE EVIDENCE that shows that the individual isn't ready This will have to be inductive evidence in the form of the person's say so, evidence that the person has a legitimate mental disability or evidence that the person doesn't have a sex drive. Otherwise, you are a gaslighting sack of shit that probably has the label ''mom'' or ''dad' attached to you.\n\n\n\nPROTECT THE VULNERABLE CHILDREN ARGUMENT\n\n\n\nThis is a really bad argument that is usually presented as an appeal to emotion but can be turned into an argument. Apparently, anyone under the age of 18 is significantly more vulnerable than anyone that is 18+ and need immediate protection from the numerous sexual predators that surround us. Yes, this goes back to one of the terrible arguments from above, but it's actually even worse than that. By this logic, we can also make a case for banning parents from having children under the age of 18, especially since children are the most vulnerable when they are with their parents from the beginning since they are at their youngest, the power differential is the largest one out of any relationship, and most parents cut part of their child's penis off at birth, which seems like an act of sexual predation since it involves their penis and cutting part of it off. So yeah, there's that absurdity and the fact that the 18 thing is completely arbitrary and has no evidence to support it. \n\n\n\nTHE CLASSIC STATIST ARGUMENT\n\n\nThis is a very popular argument statists like to use when they are arguing for their ''laws'' and why it's to have them and why it's okay to use coercion and force on innocent people. ''This bad thing COULD and does happen with some people so we need to use coercion and violence against everyone in the population if they don't follow the law so that society or most people don't do those acts'' For starters, the COULD in this is not based on any strong evidence or likelihood since the number of people who are performing the bad actions are usually in a minority. There is also the fact that these people are holding a position that could be used to throw hundreds of thousands of people in a cage if they don't follow certain laws (that are probably victimless crimes). The inductive evidence for the claim that society or most people would start doing those aforesaid bad acts (that comes in the form of a minority performing certain immoral actions) or for the claim that ''we need laws to protect us\" is certainly not strong enough to warrant a position that could be used to justify using coercion and violence against most of the population. This position could also be used to argue for (and make a stronger case for) making laws against people having children and becoming parents since MOST of them perform bad actions on their children. '' Since a smaller group of people are doing bad things we need to hold a position that it's okay to do bad things to most of the population.'' This is obviously an absurd position and it obviously applies to the age of consent nonsense too.\n\n\nSEX IS HARMFUL TO CHILDREN WHEN THEY DO IT WITH ADULTS \n\n\nOnce again, the term ''child'' is from the aforementioned government gibberish. I see this stupid claim made here and there on sites like Youtube and on certain blogs, but there is never any evidence shown that demonstrates that sex between a 17-year-old and someone older is inherently harmful. We are not talking about harm from an STD or pregnancy, we are talking about sudden, magical harms that manifests  after the younger individual has sex with the older individual. I would love to see an actual scientific study or trial that was done on this where they got a 17-year-old and a 30-year-old (for example), got them to have willing sex, and then assessed the mental condition of the younger person afterward. I would also love to see how they repeated this experiment multiple times with different people of different ages so that. I would love to see how they controlled for the social or environmental variables that would come in the form of being judged by society and/or family and the following emotional turmoil that could very well come from that. Yeah, it hasn't happened (and probably never will) but that is the type of evidence someone would need to provide if they want wild claims like that taken seriously by anyone with an IQ above 50.",
      "json_metadata": "{\"tags\":[\"voluntaryism\",\"anarchy\",\"consent\"],\"app\":\"steemit/0.1\",\"format\":\"markdown\"}",
      "parent_author": "",
      "parent_permlink": "voluntaryism",
      "permlink": "refuting-age-of-consent-arguments-more-revised-edition",
      "title": "Refuting Age of Consent Arguments + More *Revised Edition*"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-09-11T09:15:21",
  "trx_id": "92591b449c8536376df399c646dbc606d909f991",
  "trx_in_block": 17,
  "virtual_op": 0
}

{
  "block": 24858169,
  "op": [
    "delegate_vesting_shares",
    {
      "delegatee": "johnnyt1991",
      "delegator": "steem",
      "vesting_shares": "9103.590296 VESTS"
    }
  ],
  "op_in_trx": 0,
  "timestamp": "2018-08-07T11:58:30",
  "trx_id": "bbadbf3322f7194fcf59f6d4e7bdb71aaab4aa63",
  "trx_in_block": 0,
  "virtual_op": 0
}