Reply #218: So, chimpyis, you have indeed bought in to the idea

[Threedifferentones]

That there is a black and white cut off in age, before which sex is exploitative, after which it is not.

In the case of beating, the one act is immoral, while the rest of the relationship may not be. Beating one's lover is clearly immoral because one party is victimized to satisfy the others' rage and desire for control. It seems very hard to come up with circumstances to mitigate beating one's spouse, and I have never encountered any such IRL, hence such abuse approaches being necessarily, or absolutely, wrong. That is why it is illegal. I would question how the abused party could feel safe and happy around someone they fear, but that is a question for another day. Unlike spouse abuse, which is wrong when it happens no matter how the couple ends up, sex is not necessarily exploitative, which is exactly the point of this conversation.

I was not trying to say the ends justify the means, I was pointing out that if no one is hurt or coerced, and everyone is satisfied, THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS, there is/was no problem.

You are basically saying: If a 25 year old and a 17.99 year old have sex, the 25 year old may as well have beaten the soon-to-be 18 year old, he is that heinously immoral. Once the younger turns 18 in a few days, however, it's totally kosher. Moreover, if a 65 year old is having sex with an 18 year old, this is no more worrisome than 25 and 18. This makes no sense and really hurts more than it helps.

You do not seem to be stupid, it is strange that you try to defend this indefensible policy of ours...