Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I find that extremely different to answer. Firstly, you are asking about a point in time for a slow movement that took many years. Then there are different levels: the argumentation of the lawmakers and other politicians, the argumentation of courts, the argumentation of the media. They all switched to the paradigm that focuses on consent at different points in time. And a few years later they started to be embarrassed of what their respective outlets had said earlier. The relevant chapter in the German penal code used to be "Crimes and offences against morality" and was re-named to "Crimes and offences against sexual self-determination" in 1973.
by Katrin on Tue Jun 11th, 2013 at 05:53:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, that really nails it. The transition was from one of culturally-defined "morality", which in most cases amounts to property rights, to one of individual rights.

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
by eurogreen on Tue Jun 11th, 2013 at 06:12:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I understand there was a transition period, but if we are not still in the transition period, there was some kind of end to the transition period. For example, I think I saw something about German Greens and child sex discussions in the 80ies. Was the old paradigm still being fought then? Is that the tail end of the transition so it should be interpreted as poeple who had not noticed that the debate was moving on, or is it something else?

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Tue Jun 11th, 2013 at 02:02:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, that was still the process of discarding the old paradigm and introducing a new one, in the domain of party politics and writing programmes. In the domain of legislation the process probably ended 1994 when the same age of consent for straight and gay sex was introduced. The press exaggerates the affair of debating paedophilia and the age of consent shamelessly though. We didn't kick the paedophiles out without a debate: this topic had to be debated. Nowadays it is taboo. Re-read the absurdity of the laws we had then, and you know why we had to question everything, in this case very vehemently and unharmonously, by the way.

The main proponent of abolishing the age of consent, a man always accompanied by half a dozen kids, hijacked every party conference. He had picked them up from the street. These kids hadn't known an adult paying attention to them before and they were absolutely loyal to him. Whenever we tried to kick their topic off the agenda they started a noise. We delegated the matter to a commission in which he could participate. Probably that was naïve, but so what?

by Katrin on Tue Jun 11th, 2013 at 03:11:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
 "In the domain of legislation the process probably ended 1994 when the same age of consent for straight and gay sex was introduced."

I remember a discussion in socialist youth camp in 1992 where the question of the different ages of consent for homosexual and heterosexual sex was discussed and at least one participant demanded the abolition of the general concept of the age of consent.

The bundestag deputy present did strike that down at once, though.

by IM on Thu Jun 13th, 2013 at 12:37:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series