Give Childhood Back

Childhood is a concept that has become lost in today's society. It seems the push is ever greater to get kids to grow up faster. Yet almost paradoxically, adults try to shield youth from everything that could possibly deem offensive. It is no wonder the world seems very confusing to today's youths, more so than ever.

First of all, let us examine the issue de jour. The Harper government plans to raise the age of sexual consent from 14 to 16. The current law, that allows youth to legally have sex with anyone of any age at 14 has been on the books since the late 1800s. Raising the age to 16 would bring Canada into line with the rest of the developing world.
Raising the age of consent by two years is viewed as a positive step by many Canadians, but oddly enough, it is facing fearce opposition from others. Several interest groups are strongly against raising the age by two years. Accoding to a recent article in the National Post, these are Justice for Children and Youth, the Canadian Federation for Sexual Health (formerly Planned Parenthood), the Canadian AIDS Society and Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere. The most surprising ones on the list are the AIDS society and Planned Parenting. Logically, one would think they'd approve of teen abstinance in order to prevent unplanned pregnancy and STDs. According to them, however, they feel that raising the age of consent would force teen sex underground. These interest groups have missed the boat entirely.
There is an exemption in the new law that would allow teens under 16 to have relations with another person as long as they are no more than 5 years older. Meaning that teens can still legally have relations with other teens. The point of this law is to protect our youth from sexual predators. Perhaps it's just me, but I find it deeply sickening that a 45 year old man would be having relations with a 14 or 15 year old girl, or vice versa. It is easy for these men and women to take advantage of young, naive teenagers. Not to mention the higher risk of STD's if a teen is with an older partner who may be a sexual predator.
Personally, I think the age should be raised to 18 as it is in the United States. If you are not considered mature enough to drink, vote, or appear in pornography at 14 and 16, then how can you be mature enough to have a sexual relationship? Obviously there must be some gray area to allow relations with other teens, but allowing them with adults who are much older is unacceptable. It is simply a case of forcing kids to be adults far too quickly. One should not have to worry about complex adult matters such as sexual relationships at 14. To end on a lighter note, I believe Isac Hayes once said "there's a time and a place for everything, and it's called college".

Now about the paradox of children in our society. Forcing them to grow fast, yet shielding them from everything. The idea of protecting kids from everything that could possibly be deemed offensive of mind warping that's present in today's society. (Somehow underaged sex doesn't seem to fall under mind warping though.)
Back in grade school, we used to play a game called Presidents and Assassins. We split into two teams. One team was the Secret Service. The other was the assassins. One kid was made president and it was the job of the secret service to protect him from ths assasins. We'd "shoot" at each other with the age old finger pistols. This game has remained popular for some time, but now some parents are complaining that it's too violent and it encourages gun play. I used to play this game all the time and I've never even picked up a gun in my life. The schools have now been forced to ban this game, along with other popular childrens' games such as war, snowball fights, british bulldog, etc. They are simply too violent for children! That's what the parent's are declaring. Meanwhile, the same parents are going out and buying their 9 year old M rated video games such as Grand Theft Auto, and then they complain that these games are too violent. I guess the big sticker that says "M for Mature: Only for 17+" isn't a good enough indicator of the game's content.
Then again, when it comes to fictional content, parents can go over board in not letting their kids view it. I had somebody tell me yesterday that they wished somebody would shoot Homer and Bart Simpson dead because they encourage children rebelling against authority. A ludicrous notion. Children have been rebelling against authority long before Simpsons creator Matt Geroning was born. I hardly think Bart Simpsons has anything to do with it. If he does, it's the parent's fault and not poor Bart's. That's because the Simpsons, as well as Family Guy, South Park, and all the other shows that parents rant and rave agaisnt are fictional. The program is like that to be funny. If Bart's relationship with Homer was like that stupid Leave it to Beaver show, nobody would watch it. It would be dull. The problem, as I discussed in a past article is parent's failing to teach their children the difference between fiction and reality. As long as parents tell the child that Bart and Homer are just silly cartoon characters and that it's not appropriate to emulate them, then there should be no problems. Obviosuly a four year old should not be watching those kinds of shows though. Parent's need to use their own discression but also to stop being so up tight. For the one child that does do something bad because of something they saw on TV or in a game, there are probably thousands or even millions of other children who did nothing wrong. Why should their fun be spoild because one of their peers is an idiot. Parents should not rely on the schools and the government to declar what's appropriate as every kid is different. Use your brains.