Board Thread:Character Discussion/@comment-34563899-20180218220444/@comment-1916997-20180220134429

Aine1989 wrote: CoolDudeAl wrote: Aine1989 wrote: CoolDudeAl wrote: Aine1989 wrote: CoolDudeAl wrote: Aine1989 wrote: CoolDudeAl wrote: Aine1989 wrote: I am of the opinion that no atter what the age of consent is in a country, adult/child relationships are wrong. In the Phillipines the age of consent is 12, does that mean adults having sex with 12 year olds is okay?

Regardless we know from the captions from the episode Tallahassee that they were in Oregon. Rewatch the episode if you do not know. And a simple Google search tells us the age of consent in Oregon is 18. And given that Henry was already 10 on her 28th birthday, and his birthday is either August or March, depending on which one you believe, we know she was under 18 when she gave birth and when he was conceived.

Also who cares if we don't know exactly how old Neal was? We know he was much older than Emma. Even if he was biologically 18 (which is next to impossible) we know he was over 300 years old. I refer back to TVD/Twilight. A 300 year old adult taking advantage of a child is the same as a 23 year old taking advantage of a child.

If you care to read my rebuttal, there is nothing "obvious" about Hook's statement, and you have to ignore everythign from that scene, the next scene and his character in general to make your statement slightly plausible. What I want to know if why you are determined to twist canon to make a character you dislike a rapist while ignoring a case of rape. You complain about people who dislike Hook but like Neal, but you do literally the exact same thing in reverse, because you dislike Neal and like Hook. I'm neutral to both, for the record. I just want to point out that your argument falls flat, because you say that Neal is like 300+ mentally, which to you is gross because Emma is 17 or 18, but then Hook is even older than Neal, so how is 400+ mentally being with a 28 year old any less gross? ftr I don't dislike people who happen to like Neal and dislike Hook, I have problems with people accusing Hook of stuff Neal did (and Hook did not do). And this is a prime example; accusing Killian of being a rapist while denying Neal's sexual abuse of Emma.

Killian and Emma's age difference is perfectly fine because last I checked, 28 is not a child. If you live in a country where 28 is considered a child, then yes rage on that age difference to your heart's content, but I highly doubt you do given the world's oldest age of consent is 21 (Baharin).

There is a huge difference between two adults with an age difference and an adult and a child/teenger (and do not come at me with the "but 16/17 is not a child" because it kind of is). You are hung up on terms that has no solid definition. From a purly physical standpoint, we could say someone is an adult when they can produce the nessisary things that allow them to reproduce (so when a female starts releasing eggs and a male starts releaseing sperm). In humans, that winds up being around 12-14 for girls and 14-16 for boys (roughly, obviously some people are earlier or later). If we are talking mentally, there are studies that show the brain is not fully developed until late 20's (again females tend to be a bit earlier than males). Basically, you are getting hung up on your personal definition of the words "child" and "adult", probably because it supports your point, to an extent. You have obviously looked into consent ages, and noticed that different countries and cultures see different ages as "able to consent for sex", so that basically invalidates your whole arguement. There is no magical age where one is no longer a "child" and suddenly an "adult". Do you honestly think 16 is old enough to consent to sex, let alone with someone years older than them?

And yes, brains do continue developing as we grow. Meaning a 16 year old and a 23 year old have such a big gap in terms of development that true consent is impossible. Yes there is no magical age where you suddenly become an adult but for god's sake, adults should not be having relationships with people young enough to still be in school.

No offence, but your whole "age is just a number" mentality is rather disturbing. I don't have an "age is just a number" mentality, quite the opposite actually, I think 80 year old men being with a 20 year old woman (or vice versa) is extremely gross. But (biologically) Neal and Emma, as well as Emma and Hook, aren't that far apart in age. Just because the actor was 40 doesn't mean his character was, just like Jen was playing 18 year old Emma, when she is quite a bit older. You realise it is not physically possible for Emma to have been 18, right? Because Henry was 10 before her 28th birthday. And was 12 when she was 29.

You were literally saying that there is no "solid definition" for an adult and a child whci strays into "age is just a number" territories.

Do you honestly think Emma at 16 was just as mature as she was when she was 29? Obviously, Emma has more life experience at 29 than 16. But that is true of anybody. Maybe people shouldn't be allowed to have sex until they are 50 then, if we are saying people need to have a significant amount of life experience. XD No my point is that children (and yes, 16 is a child. Or a teenager if you want to be specific) are not mature enough to have sex with adults.

Your brain does so much developing between 16 and your 20s. And when you have someone who is over 20 in a relationship with a 16 year old, the maturity gap makes true consent impossible. The whole problem with your arguement is you are assuming Neal is older, because the actor was older. Neal very well could have been 19, which according to you, would be totally acceptable for Emma to be with. As I said, they had Jen playing 17/18 year old Emma, and she is clearly older than that.