1) What do you think the age of consent should be?
I don't know enough about the psychological development in adolescence to give a direct answer, but it would seem that it is most protective of our young to come to an answer from a psycho social analysis, rather than an emotional instinct. The emotional instinct is yours, as an adult outsider, and not necessarily representative of what is experienced by the subject.


2) Do you think my brother's behavior is wrong?
I do, but I think his wrong is more complex than that of a predator taking indiscriminate victims in the pursuit of pleasure. I don't know how he engages with these women. But take the most optimistic assumption, that the girl is aware, and that the experience is something she profited from and has no regrets. Even in this scenario I think he is in the wrong. Society puts the legal age of consent at a point where it protects as many young people as possible and allows them a window where the less mature can catch up with their already mature equals (in age). If your brother is strictly pursuing women who have just passed that point of security, then he is working against a social convention that is in place to protect slower developers. It is legal at a given age because that's as far as society deemed it necessary to provide security for slower developers, without depriving the larger percentage of that population from something that is a natural part of their development. He could therefore be more heinous to social order, than to the women (assuming the best case scenario where the girl takes value from the experience). But then there are the abundance of factors that may arise from serial sexual encounters of this kind. The more women he has sex with, the higher the probability that one will be totally unprepared for the experience, or will not understand the implications of the encounter, or will even be afraid throughout but too ashamed to speak out.

The interpretation that conveys your brother as a master manipulator or sexual pervert is unhelpful, I would say. In discussions about sexual misconduct we are too often overly emotive and lump all perpetrators into one class of stigmatized outcasts. In my opinion your brother is behaving selfishly and his selfishness carries the potential to do harm to these women, harm which he has either downplayed or dismissed.

3) Should our family friends be told about my brother?
My simple answer is yes. Yes for many reasons. Firstly he stands by his actions, and doesn't think he's doing anything wrong. So then there should be no reason for him to expect secrecy. There's a difference between showing loyalty to family by helping them improve themselves, and showing loyalty by helping disguise their flaws. No service is done by masking a loved ones flaws. If he poses a risk to a 14 year old girl which you have the power to eliminate by talking, then shouldn't you speak? If there is adequate evidence that without telling her parents, he poses a real threat, then who benefits from you carrying that burden? If he was to act, then more harm would be created through your silence, assuming again that there is adequate evidence that telling them is the only preventative option. (I am trying to answer throughout in a manner that encompasses the entire spectrum of who your brother could be, and the range of harm that could arise from his actions.

4) If your answer to questions 2 and 3 are yes, what in general am I ethically obligated to do? I am thinking above and beyond notifying our friends. Should I create a website solely devoted to my brother's behavior and engage in SEO so that his name will be a top 10 hit if someone googles him?

I suggest that you are no more or less responsible for telling the world about your brother than you are of helping a homeless person that you encounter on the street. That being my opinion of your responsibility, my thoughts about whether you "should" create a website about your brother must take into consideration your relationship with him, your parents, and your community. You should consider ultimately what you believe your brother is capable of, but also acknowledge that false assumptions could ruin his life. I wouldn't think that you should publicly brand any person so severely unless you had irrefutable evidence that the threat is real and even then I'm not sure that ethically you are the person to do so. You are too close to be objective perhaps, and a better course of action for you to maximize ethical integrity could be to try to speak with him, learn the extremeness of his actions and whether he himself wants to change. If you reach a point where you evaluate he is a real threat then I would suggest unburdening it to people who are un-involved. Perhaps an ultimatum to him to speak to a counselor about it or you report what you know to be true. I hasten to mention that this is all conjecture and only examples of ethical approaches to various potential realities.

If you are seeking the highest moral position, then I think the starting point is to be honest with yourself about how clearly you can analyse the situation from such a close position. The matter about the 14 year old is a tangible and imminent circumstance which you can make a judgment call based on the knowledge you have. What your role is regarding your brother's actions in general is a much more complex issue which will take more careful consideration, in my opinion

And law, too, is a statement of collective wisdom. — tim wood

But how can it be when in Spain the age of consent is 13, in the UK its 16 (but 14 in some circumstances), in France the law is different (they don't have an age of consent) but effectively its 11? Are you saying that the entire non-American population are not wise? Or is there something special about American 16 year old that means denying them the choice about what to do with their own bodies is 'wisdom' but it is not so with European 16 year olds?

The reason why human rights legislation works so well is that it is universal, not cultural. You're trying to make your own cultural biases into a deontology.

Your argument so far relies solely on the repeated use of the word 'children'. However, the age range 16-19 years is not considered to designate children when it comes to giving consent for sexual relationships. If you think the categorisation should be changed then that is your opinion and you are welcome to it. However, I was making the point that it is more effective to take each case on an individual basis and consider the intentions of all those involved. In future I would appreciate if you would take my argument on its own merit (or lack of) and refrain from emotional outbursts. The fact is that you condemned the guy from the start and that is not the way to have a reasonable discussion.

What do you think the age of consent should be? — Tree Falls

As society advances the age of consent gets higher.
This is clear when we compare societies, but also animals.
So its not about being nasty to those who have a different age,
but about realizing that progress of the mind is the purpose
in having the highest possible age of consent. Of course, the
other side is that if the age is too high then that society starts
to shrink in purely physical terms.

Your argument so far relies solely on the repeated use of the word 'children'. — Perplexed

Indeed it does. But let's see if we can get to some agreed ground. You read the OP. Taking the OP to be a statement of facts, what is your judgment, in plain words, of the person in question? No rationalizations, no speculations, just the facts.

But how can it be when — Pseudonym

...? Are you suggesting that it isn't?

Indeed it does. But let's see if we can get to some agreed ground. You read the OP. Taking the OP to be a statement of facts, what is your judgment, in plain words, of the person in question? No rationalizations, no speculations, just the facts. — tim wood

His brother is interested in sleeping with 16 year olds, who in his state of residence are above the age of consent. The friend's daughter is 14, and there is no evidence that his brother has slept with anyone under the age of 16. The two cases of him being arrested for sleeping with someone under the age of consent had an age of consent of 18, and in both cases he only received a "slap on the wrist" which suggests that the girls were only just under-age, that there was little evidence, or that he had reason to believe that the girls were of age.

My judgement is that the OP has little reason to warn his friends and no reason to post a website advertising his brother's sexual interests.

Now, what is your judgment, in plain words, of the person in question? No rationalizations, no speculations, just the facts.

Now, what is your judgment, in plain words, of the person in question? No rationalizations, no speculations, just the facts. — Michael

Hi. That is my question, and take note you have not answered it - maybe you did not understand it. My judgment is that the brother is a predator and a sociopath. He's a bad actor. As such he's a hazard and a burden wherever he goes. It's suggested he needs help. I'm agnostic on that. Maybe he does; I'm not sure it's possible.

Now, what's your judgment of the man.

Hi. That is my question, and take note you have not answered it - maybe you did not understand it. My judgment is that the brother is a predator and a sociopath. He's a bad actor. As such he's a hazard and a burden wherever he goes. It's suggested he needs help. I'm agnostic on that. Maybe he does; I'm not sure it's possible. — tim wood

How did you arrive at that judgement given the facts?

Now, what's your judgment of the man.

Neutral, although depending on him having known that the two girls were under the age of 18 and that the age of consent was 18, at worst I think he's disrespectful of foreign laws.

My place is not to judge the man but the best course of action. In this case I think it is for Tree Falls to maintain the integrity of his family and do his best to mend the relationship instead of engaging in power plays with his brother that could escalate and put themselves and others at risk.

Aside from this I am in agreement with Michael and would add that it was entirely the brothers responsibility to check the girls age and be familiar with the local laws. That he did not do this is unacceptable but it does not automatically entail that he is a sexual predator and without knowing more details of the case it would be inappropriate to pass judgment on this.

1) What do you think the age of consent should be? — Tree Falls

The off-side rule in hockey is a kind of absolute. You cross the blue line ahead of the puck, you're off-side. The offside rule in soccer is different in that it is not a fixed line, rather it depends on the relative positions of the players.

Most age of consent laws are like the hockey rule; that is, they're absolute in terms of age (usually). I think a more soccer-like rule would result in less injustice. Assuming no coercion, assuming the parties "mutually consented," then for same age, no legal issue. There may be other issues, but no (immediate) issue of law.

Maybe it's bias on my part, but I think girls need more protection than boys. That is, the law for girls should not be the same as the law for boys. In any case, questions as to coercion and consent would have to be looked at.

Do you-all believe that statutory rape is/should be a serious offense? I suppose the same question is, do you think the idea of an age of consent is reasonable?

...? Are you suggesting that it isn't? — tim wood

I'm suggesting it can't be. It cannot be both wise to ban sex at age 13-18 and be wise to allow sex at age 13-18. The two opinions are directly opposed to each other, how can they both be 'wisdom'?

If you are claiming that the American law is collective wisdom then you must also be claiming that the laws of every country in Europe are not wise. If so, how is it that America ended up with wise laws but Europe did not?

Thank you for your reasoned reply.

In my opinion your brother is behaving selfishly and his selfishness carries the potential to do harm to these women, harm which he has either downplayed or dismissed. — dermanhuby

Yes, I agree.

You are too close to be objective — dermanhuby

I also agree.

I am pretty much convinced that it isn't my position to put up a website. I should see someone who is a professional in the field with my concerns.

Most age of consent laws are like the hockey rule; that is, they're absolute in terms of age (usually). I think a more soccer-like rule would result in less injustice. Assuming no coercion, assuming the parties "mutually consented," then for same age, no legal issue. There may be other issues, but no (immediate) issue of law. — tim wood

I think that's a great point. I agree.

Do you-all believe that statutory rape is/should be a serious offense? — tim wood

Depends on how far under the age of consent they are. If the age of consent is 18 and they're 17, then I don't think it should be a serious offence. If they're 12 then it should be.

I suppose the same question is, do you think the idea of an age of consent is reasonable?

Of course.

Do you think it's relevant that most likely over 90% of mothers who have daughters would think my brother's behavior is deplorable?

but I can tell you what a mother or father of the age of 40 would think of such a pursuit. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Perhaps you could tell others here why you think my brother's behavior is terrible.

Do you think it's relevant that most likely over 90% of mothers who have daughters would think my brother's behavior is deplorable? — Tree Falls

No.

So you don't think that adult women who have to care for their daughters have more insight into their sexual and psychological vulnerabilities than you do?

That's a non sequitur.

So you don't think that adult women who have to care for their daughters have more insight into their sexual and psychological vulnerabilities than you do? — Tree Falls

By what logic would mothers have some magical insight but the daughters themselves not know their own minds?

The mothers may have more insight into the particular vulnerabilities of their own daughters but it does not follow that they better understand the daughters of everybody else. Besides, your brother is accountable for his own actions within the circumstances they occurred, not the emotional biases of everybody else.

You judge my brother's actions as neutral. I am not sure of your basis for that judgment.

I say that my brother is psychologically hurting many of the girls. Part of my evidence is that mothers who have daughters would overwhelmingly agree with me. It is relevant because we are talking about psychological damage through sexual acts. Gender and age are very relevant in sexual acts. Mothers with daughters have much more insight into what could cause damage to girls at that age than you or I do because of internal experience and close observation.

By what logic would mothers have some magical insight but the daughters themselves not know their own minds? — Pseudonym

Greater experience in an area that the girl doesn't have experience in.

Mothers with daughters have much more insight into what could cause damage to girls at that age than you or I do because of internal experience and close observation. — Tree Falls

You're assuming that these mothers have only their daughter's internal well-being as the motivation for their position. You only need to look at things like 'rape-shaming' and forced marriages to see that this is blatantly not the case.

You're talking about interfering in the autonomy of another human being (two in fact). Denying a person's autonomy is considered by many ethicists to be about the most immoral thing one can do, you need an awful lot more than just speculation before you consider it.

I say that my brother is psychologically hurting many of the girls. Part of my evidence is that mothers who have daughters would overwhelmingly agree with me — Tree Falls

People agreeing with you is not evidence. What is it specifically about your brother that makes you sure that his actions have caused harm? Because this is not a clear conclusion based on the facts alone.

People agreeing with you is not evidence. — Perplexed

It might not be dispositive, but it is certainly suggestive and worth taking seriously when it involves experiences that you and I don't have.

As an analogy to help you see where I am coming from, consider product reviews on Amazon. Assuming that they are truthful, you'd probably consider it some evidence as to the quality of the product if you had no experience with the product in question.

If this analogy doesn't help you see my point of view, that's fine. I don't want to argue about the particulars of this analogy. Analogies aren't a good form of reasoning, just good for helping communication.

As an analogy to help you see where I am coming from, consider product reviews on Amazon. Assuming that they are truthful, you'd probably consider it some evidence as to the quality of the product if you had no experience with the product in question. — Tree Falls

But the effect is the same whether the reviews are truthful or not, which of course, we don't know.

Thank you for your insights. I hadn't considered that my friends might suffer indirectly through my actions. In the beginning, I had thought that any increased risk of an unpleasant encounter with my brother warranted my friends being told. I now see that there could be ramifications that I have not considered that have to be weighed against that risk.

1) What do you think the age of consent should be?
2) Do you think my brother's behavior is wrong?
3) Should our family friends be told about my brother?
4) If your answer to questions 2 and 3 are yes, what in general am I ethically obligated to do? I am thinking above and beyond notifying our friends. Should I create a website solely devoted to my brother's behavior and engage in SEO so that his name will be a top 10 hit if someone googles him? — Tree Falls

1) well in society today i think we need to understand that younger people want to have sex earlier than say their parents would like them too. i think 16 is an age were you are either mature or you are not and so maybe 16 isn't the ideal age of consent but in a lot of cases that person may be capable of making a decision like that and i don't believe that it is fair to make a person choose whether to break the law or not over sex at 16, they may be completely sure they are ready to do that and as sex is a very personal thing, they should be able to make that decision at the age of 16, if they so please.

2) it depends, is he lying to the girls? is he manipulative? i don't feel that there is enough evidence to suggest he is doing anything wrong exactly. maybe he isn't making the best decision when he chooses to do that, only because of public and family perception of him if it came out about his sexual activities. if those women are giving him undoubted consent then he is innocent, if both people consent to sex then in no way is that wrong, but it's a matter of perception like i said if you believe a 16 year old is able to consent to sex then you wont have a problem with it but if you think the opposite then you will have a different opinion.

3) i don't think so, in fact i do believe you're are being a little too worried about him, the way you are talking about him, it's almost like you believe he is capable of rape or doing something wrong. if that is what you truly believe then you do what you think is right. do you think he would have sex with a 14 year old? knowing that a 14 year old cannot really consent to that?

4) why would you want to ruin your brothers life? he hasn't done anything to make you think he is a bad person so no, don't do that if you don't believe he deserves it. you have to understand that sex is a normal thing, sounds to me like you still have the views he had before he left to the other country.

we don't know your brother so we don't have any evidence to suggest that he is a bad person.