I touched on this a bit in the Tookie thread, but really it's a whole separate issue...

Do you think statutory rape is handled too harshly?  I totally do, in many cases.  I believe the law was enacted to prevent 40 year olds from having sex with 11 year olds... but the way the law reads, it is illegal for anyone 18 years of age or older to have sex with anyone under 18.  This means it is perfectly legal for Seventeen-year-old boyfriend to have sex with Seventeen-year-old girlfriend, until he turns 18.. then it is suddenly illegal.  I think this law would make more sense if there was a gap involved... such as, it is illegal for an adult to have sex with a minor if the adult is more than 2 years older than the minor, or something like that...

I can handle the term "illegal" for this action, but did you know that someone convicted of statutory rape is labeled a sex offender?  This means basically that they are placed in the same category with child molesters, pedophiles, etc.  Their names go into the public database and people can search their neighborhoods, and find them listed as sex offenders.  I think that's way too harsh for a boyfriend/girlfriend when it's consentual, especially when they're only months apart in age.  It seems that usually the girl's parents are the only ones complaining... and even though both parties consented, only the boy gets punished.

Does that seem fair?

I don't think it's fair, because of the case you stated about if a teenage couple both 17 had sex, and then the boyfriend turned 18 and they had sex he could be arrested?  That doesn't make sense at all.  I can understand the 40 year old and 11 year old, but that's more child molestation IMHO than statiory rape. 

I agree. Once a person is sixteen, they're old enough to know whether or not they want to have sex with a particular person. I'd say it is acceptable for a 16 year old to legally have a sexual relationship (provided it's consentual) with someone who is 18 or 19. Someone who is below sixteen is generally not mature enough to be balling anyone, let alone someone who has come of age. And seriously, if you're 18, why would you be sleeping with someone who was below the age of 16?

I agree with Oddysey's rule of two years, but as long as the minor is at least 16. But then there are situation which become iffy. Like, I would think it would be OK for a 17 year old and a 20 year old to be engaged in a consentual sexual relationship, and that's a 3 year difference... but 17 year-olds of either sex are generally far more mature than 16 year-olds. That one year makes a big difference. So maybe there is no hard and fast rule for these things, and it should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, or there should be a rule that says like 16+2 OK, 17+3 OK.

I especially don't like the fact that they have to register as sex offenders.  That's just cruel and humiliating to someone who had consentual sex with their significant other.

They actually tried putting in a law stating what you suggested... making it only illegal if the adult is 2 or more years older. But the sudden uproar from everyone (especially on talk radio stations) claiming it was making molestation illegal etc made the government change their mind about it.  ::)

They actually tried putting in a law stating what you suggested... making it only illegal if the adult is 2 or more years older. But the sudden uproar from everyone (especially on talk radio stations) claiming it was making molestation illegal etc made the government change their mind about it.  ::)


^That examples speakes volumes about the advantages of a constutitional republic over a true democracy.

It varies state by state.  The age of consent in New Mexico is 13 and the age of consent in Wyoming is 19.

In Georgia it's 16.  I think it's a fair law.  Someone under the age of 16 is not mentally able to make that decision while someone above is.  If you're that rare example of a 16 year-old who had sex with your 15 year-old boyfriend/girlfriend and suddenly turned the age of consent, you're just going to have to wait.

Also don't forget that the DA also has to decide if they are even going to try a case.  And even in a trial, is there going to be a conviction?

I know that in California, it is really only used as an additional crime (like when combined with "giving drugs/alcohol to a minor" and "contributing to the delequency of a minor".  Basically, unless the subject or their parents file a complaint, or there is a large age difference between the 2 participants (normally over 2-4 years) no charges are ever filed.

Besides, can you see many juries convicting somebody who is 18 who has had sex with a 17 year old girlfriend?  And how likely is such a charge to be overturned on appeal?

Now a 40 year old man with a 17 year old girlfriend, that is very different.

Someone under the age of 16 is not mentally able to make that decision while someone above is. 

I agree, but just to play devil's advocate, I have to ask... If someone under the age of 16 is too young to be able to decide coherently that s/he wants to have sex, how then are they old enough to coherently decide to kill someone and be tried as an adult?

I didn't realize it varied by state.  I thought the minimum age was 18 for both parties everywhere. :-[

I'm glad to hear some states have a better set-up.

Mushroom, unfortunately sometimes they do get convicted, most likely because parents file a complaint...  the whole reason I brought this up is that i was looking through the database of registered sex offenders in my neighborhood and was surprised to see statutory rape listed as their crimes.  I saw a few "lewd acts with a minor", some spousal incidents, but most of them were statutory rape.

I touched on this a bit in the Tookie thread, but really it's a whole separate issue...

Do you think statutory rape is handled too harshly?  I totally do, in many cases.  I believe the law was enacted to prevent 40 year olds from having sex with 11 year olds... but the way the law reads, it is illegal for anyone 18 years of age or older to have sex with anyone under 18.  This means it is perfectly legal for Seventeen-year-old boyfriend to have sex with Seventeen-year-old girlfriend, until he turns 18.. then it is suddenly illegal.   I think this law would make more sense if there was a gap involved... such as, it is illegal for an adult to have sex with a minor if the adult is more than 2 years older than the minor, or something like that...

I can handle the term "illegal" for this action, but did you know that someone convicted of statutory rape is labeled a sex offender?  This means basically that they are placed in the same category with child molesters, pedophiles, etc.  Their names go into the public database and people can search their neighborhoods, and find them listed as sex offenders.  I think that's way too harsh for a boyfriend/girlfriend when it's consentual, especially when they're only months apart in age.   It seems that usually the girl's parents are the only ones complaining... and even though both parties consented, only the boy gets punished.

Does that seem fair?


I agree with everything you said, and to answer your question.  No it does not seem fair, but then again 99% of what happens in life is unfair.

Mushroom, unfortunately sometimes they do get convicted, most likely because parents file a complaint...  the whole reason I brought this up is that i was looking through the database of registered sex offenders in my neighborhood and was surprised to see statutory rape listed as their crimes.  I saw a few "lewd acts with a minor", some spousal incidents, but most of them were statutory rape.


And that is the right of a parent.  But then again, I would question the parent as to the discipline they give their children.

After all, if the guy gets his GF pregnant and then takes off, will it not be the parents that are at least partially responsible for raising the child?

I think it's definitely treated too harshly.  Even in the case of R. Kelly, I believe it was consensual, right?  Plus they weren't like little kids, they were like 15 (my current age).

What Kelly did was sick, no doubt about it, but comparing him to O.J. Simpson or something is pretty harsh.  That is, assuming I'm correct that it was consensual.

I think 15 or 16 is the point at which someone can truly consent to sex (assuming they're mentally stable).  I think 13-14, maybe 15 is statutory rape, 12 and under is molestation. 

I think it's definitely treated too harshly.  Even in the case of R. Kelly, I believe it was consensual, right?  Plus they weren't like little kids, they were like 15 (my current age).

What Kelly did was sick, no doubt about it, but comparing him to O.J. Simpson or something is pretty harsh.  That is, assuming I'm correct that it was consensual.

I think 15 or 16 is the point at which someone can truly consent to sex (assuming they're mentally stable).  I think 13-14, maybe 15 is statutory rape, 12 and under is molestation. 


I agree with you. 15 or 16 are probably the ideal age for the age of consent; basically, high school age(excpet for maybe 9th grade). But its up to the individual states, and some do choose to set it higher. I think with the case of New Mexico, 13 is too low.

If someone under the age of 16 is too young to be able to decide coherently that s/he wants to have sex, how then are they old enough to coherently decide to kill someone and be tried as an adult?


When someone makes the decision to kill, they forfeit their childhood.  If a 15 year-old makes the decision to take someones' life, plans it and does it in cold-blood, then I believe that 15 year-old should never see another free day in their life.

.....12 and under is molestation. 


No it's not.  Statutory rape is a different thing.

Statutory rape is when someone of or above a states' age of consent has consensual sex with someone under the age of consent.  So a 20 year-old having consensual sex with a 10 year-old is statutory rape.

I agree with you. 15 or 16 are probably the ideal age for the age of consent; basically, high school age(excpet for maybe 9th grade). But its up to the individual states, and some do choose to set it higher. I think with the case of New Mexico, 13 is too low.


13 is too low.  But I do think some 13 year olds are smart enough, but even so if an adult wanted to have sex with them they'd be a pervert anyways.  Even 14 is a little too low, although I think a lot of 14-year olds would be mature enough (I know I would be when I was 14).

I agree with everything you said, and to answer your question.  No it does not seem fair, but then again 99% of what happens in life is unfair.

Yeah, especially my life...that might be a low estimate in my case!
;D

Furthermore, Western society, especially the U.S., infantilizes teenagers.  Thus, when a young woman is most fertile it is illegal to reproduce with her.  On top of that, well not literally, I hear seventeen and eighteen year olds refered to as "child" and "children" by policy-makers.  This is not only insulting, it also saps a sense of self-sufficiency and responsibility from young people, and since there isn't much for young people to do, we put their adulthood on ice for an additional four to eight years in a sham called college.  College keeps young people out of the job market, and highly participatory in the consumer market.  The resultant hedonism gives young people an incentive to concern themselves too much with drinking and f**king. 
By the time the socially retarded programming of high school and college are done with you, you are a permanent child in an adult's body.  The government is then in a position to tell you you may not trust your own judgment and chances are your judgment is not trustworthy. 
Nothing biolgically significant happens on your eighteenth or your twenty-first birthday.  I wish people would focus on becoming mature and autonomous individuals as soon as they hit puberty, rather than think some magical number is going to do it for them!
::)

Yeah, especially my life...that might be a low estimate in my case!
;D

Furthermore, Western society, especially the U.S., infantilizes teenagers.  Thus, when a young woman is most fertile it is illegal to reproduce with her.  On top of that, well not literally, I hear seventeen and eighteen year olds refered to as "child" and "children" by policy-makers.  This is not only insulting, it also saps a sense of self-sufficiency and responsibility from young people, and since there isn't much for young people to do, we put their adulthood on ice for an additional four to eight years in a sham called college.  College keeps young people out of the job market, and highly participatory in the consumer market.  The resultant hedonism gives young people an incentive to concern themselves too much with drinking and f**king. 
By the time the socially retarded programming of high school and college are done with you, you are a permanent child in an adult's body.  The government is then in a position to tell you you may not trust your own judgment and chances are your judgment is not trustworthy. 
Nothing biolgically significant happens on your eighteenth or your twenty-first birthday.  I wish people would focus on becoming mature and autonomous individuals as soon as they hit puberty, rather than think some magical number is going to do it for them!
::)


Amen brotha'. My uncle always talks about this; its one of his biggest peeves about today's society. "What the hell ever happened to grown men in this country? This generation of 30 somethings and 20 somethings seem like overgrown kids"..and uh, unfortunately thats yours/our(Gen X and Y) generations he is talking about..but sadly I have to agree.

When he turned 14 he started working(different time) and buying as much of his own stuff as he could. Clothes, all of his own entertainment, even food as much as he could. He paid for all of his gas and dates. At 17 after graduating early he left home and joined the Army. He said "i just decided at 14 that what I wanted to be was a grown man and I worked at it from then on".

Amen brotha'. My uncle always talks about this; its one of his biggest peeves about today's society. "What the hell ever happened to grown men in this country? This generation of 30 somethings and 20 somethings seem like overgrown kids"..and uh, unfortunately thats yours/our(Gen X and Y) generations he is talking about..but sadly I have to agree.

When he turned 14 he started working(different time) and buying as much of his own stuff as he could. Clothes, all of his own entertainment, even food as much as he could. He paid for all of his gas and dates. At 17 after graduating early he left home and joined the Army. He said "i just decided at 14 that what I wanted to be was a grown man and I worked at it from then on".


Being 15 (16 on Jan 16), I consider myself an adult :)

Being 15 (16 on Jan 16), I consider myself an adult :)


Not trying to be rude but a lot of people who most definitely are not grown adults consider themselves to be. Not saying that about you, but I just wonder what about yourself makes you inclined to say that?

Btw, I turn 18 January 14th. I'm 2 years 2 days older.  ;D

Amen brotha'. My uncle always talks about this; its one of his biggest peeves about today's society. "What the hell ever happened to grown men in this country? This generation of 30 somethings and 20 somethings seem like overgrown kids"..and uh, unfortunately thats yours/our(Gen X and Y) generations he is talking about..but sadly I have to agree.

When he turned 14 he started working(different time) and buying as much of his own stuff as he could. Clothes, all of his own entertainment, even food as much as he could. He paid for all of his gas and dates. At 17 after graduating early he left home and joined the Army. He said "i just decided at 14 that what I wanted to be was a grown man and I worked at it from then on".

I'm not saying getting a job at the age of 14 is an automatic initiation into adulthood.  And I certainly don't want to suggest that young women should start having children as soon as they're biologically capable.  This is the kind of stuff that used to go on in the old days, and there was plenty of oppression in the old days.  Depending on your skin color, you might by law spend your whole life as a second class citizen, and as a woman you might well be required to get married and make babies at the age of sixteen with no say in the matter.
I am saying we have gone waaaay to far in the OTHER direction.  I believe a lot of it has to do with how much the economy has changed.  We don't have a countryside full of family farms or urban complexes full of factory jobs.  We don't have labor unions to help less skilled workers get a decent wage.  I would estimate about 80% of our population above the age of 14 is surfeit to the economy our capitalist greed-heads of set up for us since the 1950s.  

My point boils down to a firm belief that it is fundamentally unhealthy to pressure every adolescent to go to college.  It is funamentally unhealthy to deny a healthy eighteen year old the right to earn a lving and start a family.  It is fundamentally unhealthy to regard teenagers and young adults as children, or to encourage them to regard themselves as less-than adult.  
One reason "sex education" doesn't work well is because it is not coordinated into a holistic "life education."  As I always say, as soon as you get adult plumbing, you need adult wiring.

I have a unique perspective on this due to unfortunate psychiatric problems I developed as a young adult.  I worked about 30 hours a week at a supermarket all through high school.  I grumbled a lot about my job and the idiots I worked with, but in retrospect, it was much more rewarding than friggin' high school.  I then left that job and tried to go to college.  Then my major depression got worse...and continued to get worse.  I struggled through college, dropping in and dropping out for a decade before attaining a degree.  I lived off a hand-to-mouth allowance from my family because my illness rendered me incapable of working and going to school at the same time.  I simply had not the mental or physiological stanima.  
I have both the experience of independence (or at least semi-independence) and coddled dependence as an adult.  I had little choice in my dependence because of the psychiatric issues that developed in my late teens.  However, my family was no good at fostering any direction in my life, and I kept lapsing back onto their dole until the funds set aside for me were tapped out.
It may seem obvious to some, but autonomy and independence are wonderful for the human spirit.

You may say, "Ha, then why do you support a welfare state?"  Ideally there would be no welfare state for those of reasonably able body and mind.  However, that means there must be a secure job with a living wage for any man or woman who seeks one.  To your capitalist greed-heads, this proposition is more horrifying than the welfare state!
::)

Being 15 (16 on Jan 16), I consider myself an adult :)

And if you think and behave like an adult, you're probably considered a nerd by your peers.

And if you think and behave like an adult, you're probably considered a nerd by your peers.


I'm rather square, yes  :D

I'm not saying getting a job at the age of 14 is an automatic initiation into adulthood.  And I certainly don't want to suggest that young women should start having children as soon as they're biologically capable.  This is the kind of stuff that used to go on in the old days, and there was plenty of oppression in the old days.  Depending on your skin color, you might by law spend your whole life as a second class citizen, and as a woman you might well be required to get married and make babies at the age of sixteen with no say in the matter.
I am saying we have gone waaaay to far in the OTHER direction.  I believe a lot of it has to do with how much the economy has changed.  We don't have a countryside full of family farms or urban complexes full of factory jobs.  We don't have labor unions to help less skilled workers get a decent wage.  I would estimate about 80% of our population above the age of 14 is surfeit to the economy our capitalist greed-heads of set up for us since the 1950s. 

My point boils down to a firm belief that it is fundamentally unhealthy to pressure every adolescent to go to college.  It is funamentally unhealthy to deny a healthy eighteen year old the right to earn a lving and start a family.  It is fundamentally unhealthy to regard teenagers and young adults as children, or to encourage them to regard themselves as less-than adult. 
One reason "sex education" doesn't work well is because it is not coordinated into a holistic "life education."  As I always say, as soon as you get adult plumbing, you need adult wiring.

I have a unique perspective on this due to unfortunate psychiatric problems I developed as a young adult.  I worked about 30 hours a week at a supermarket all through high school.  I grumbled a lot about my job and the idiots I worked with, but in retrospect, it was much more rewarding than friggin' high school.  I then left that job and tried to go to college.  Then my major depression got worse...and continued to get worse.  I struggled through college, dropping in and dropping out for a decade before attaining a degree.  I lived off a hand-to-mouth allowance from my family because my illness rendered me incapable of working and going to school at the same time.  I simply had not the mental or physiological stanima. 
I have both the experience of independence (or at least semi-independence) and coddled dependence as an adult.  I had little choice in my dependence because of the psychiatric issues that developed in my late teens.  However, my family was no good at fostering any direction in my life, and I kept lapsing back onto their dole until the funds set aside for me were tapped out.
It may seem obvious to some, but autonomy and independence are wonderful for the human spirit.

You may say, "Ha, then why do you support a welfare state?"  Ideally there would be no welfare state for those of reasonably able body and mind.  However, that means there must be a secure job with a living wage for any man or woman who seeks one.  To your capitalist greed-heads, this proposition is more horrifying than the welfare state!
::)


I knew what you were saying i was just giving an example I had of someone who was independent early on.

You have a damn good point about college. I feel like I wasted my time this past semester. I was pressured in to going myself. They try to scare you into thinking if you take any time off first that its like a law of science "you wont go back! you'll live under a bridge! booga booga!". I found it to be an unsatisfying experience and I was pretty depressed through the semester. I'm not going to go back this semester. I'm taking 6 months off, and during this time I plan to work full-time. Next year I plan on going back, but this time I intend to get an Associate of Applied Sciences in Culinary Arts. I think getting a trade is much better for me than toiling for years for a piece of paper that(as shown by chronic underemployment) is NOT a gurauntee of a succesful future. I'd rather do this and be working full-time in my career before I am even 21. I figure if I manage the money I make right as a chef I can eventially open a resturaunt, and I hope to possibly even be able to retire from working full time by 45. Its basically what my cousin did except he became a welder. Hes 31 now and its working just fine for him.

I think that if I were to go back and keep trying for a B.A. and all that stuff I probably won't even really get out there and start building my financial lot in life until I'm at least 23 or 24; if I am lucky. At my community college I met lots of people in their late 20s still toiling there and that scared me.


And if you think and behave like an adult, you're probably considered a nerd by your peers.


Especially if you dress like one. My sophmore year I decided i'd feel more confident and grown up if I started dressing like one. Real shirtss, dress pants, real shoes rather than tennis shoes. And that taught me how small minded teens really are. The same kids who would talk down conformity all the time(all the punk rocker and goth kids) turned around and pre-judged me because of how I dressed. Now ain't that ironic!  :D

I think you're right about that, Max.  I also didn't have a typical teenager life.  My mom married a man who didn't like kids/teens.. he had even given his own kids from his first marriage up for adoption after they divorced.. But she was in love with him, and what he wanted was all that really mattered.  So they ended up moving out of state when I was 17, leaving me to fend for myself. (Prior to them leaving I basically felt like a prisoner in my bedroom.  I didn't feel comfortable being around them at all.) 

Looking back, I am almost grateful for my bad experiences... because that was when I feel I truly grew up.  Luckily, I managed to hang on without getting sucked into drugs, gangs or any other kind of trouble... I did drop out of high school, and I had to lie about my age just to be able to work full time.

But I can honestly say, I have no regrets, no hard feelings toward anyone, even if it did feel like hell at the time.

Especially if you dress like one. My sophmore year I decided i'd feel more confident and grown up if I started dressing like one. Real shirtss, dress pants, real shoes rather than tennis shoes. And that taught me how small minded teens really are. The same kids who would talk down conformity all the time(all the punk rocker and goth kids) turned around and pre-judged me because of how I dressed. Now ain't that ironic!  :D

For me it's not so much about attire.  I was sort of a New Romantic/Goth in the '80s.  I was Goth before it was called Goth, you know, The Cure look.  It's more about demeanor and attitude.  I grew out of disrupting class and tripping other kids in the halls by the time I was in sixth grade.  I live in a college town and work on a university campus, and I'm reeeeeallly sick of all these guys who think they're Joe Cool because they act like Pauly Shore!

For me it's not so much about attire.  I was sort of a New Romantic/Goth in the '80s.  I was Goth before it was called Goth, you know, The Cure look.  It's more about demeanor and attitude.  I grew out of disrupting class and tripping other kids in the halls by the time I was in sixth grade.  I live in a college town and work on a university campus, and I'm reeeeeallly sick of all these guys who think they're Joe Cool because they act like Pauly Shore!


I'd rather be Steve Martin. Being a jerk always suited me.  :D

When someone makes the decision to kill, they forfeit their childhood.  If a 15 year-old makes the decision to take someones' life, plans it and does it in cold-blood, then I believe that 15 year-old should never see another free day in their life.


So, do they also forfeit their childhood when they make the decision to have sex? When they plan it and do it in cold sheets?

You see, you really haven't addressed the question itself. I asked how a mind that is incapable of being responsible for decisions of a sexual nature can in the same turn be totally responsible for decisions of a criminal nature... If 15 years old is old enough to fry, why isn't it old enough to f**k?

If 15 years old is old enough to fry, why isn't it old enough to f**k?


The Supreme Court ruled long ago that executing people under 16 (don't remember the year, just that it involved a murderer under 16 from Alabama) was a violation of the eighth amendment.  And, as was talked about here, executing people under 18 was suddenly found to be illegal in the constitution (must be that whole living thing.)  I've never supported the death penalty for people under the age of 16 at the time of their crimes, but I think life in prison without parole is a very acceptable punishment.

I feel that once murder is done, any notion that someone may be considered a minor flies out the window.  A 15 year-old having sex with another 15 year-old I have no problem with (well, yeah I do) but I just don't see a 15 year-old being competent to make a decision to have sex with a 30 year-old when their parents will be the ones getting sued if something happens.

To go slightly of topic here.I just want to understand this, is it true then that every young person in America has to go to college regardless of whether they actually want to go or are academically clever enough too ? That's nuts ! Surely further education should be a matter of choice.

To go slightly of topic here.I just want to understand this, is it true then that every young person in America has to go to college regardless of whether they actually want to go or are academically clever enough too ? That's nuts ! Surely further education should be a matter of choice.


They don't HAVE to.  I didn't.  But there is a common perception that without a college education, a good job will be out of reach.

It is true that many employers in America put too much emphasis on pieces of paper and not enough on skills and qualifications.  But that isn't always the case.

The Supreme Court ruled long ago that executing people under 16 (don't remember the year, just that it involved a murderer under 16 from Alabama) was a violation of the eighth amendment.  And, as was talked about here, executing people under 18 was suddenly found to be illegal in the constitution (must be that whole living thing.)  I've never supported the death penalty for people under the age of 16 at the time of their crimes, but I think life in prison without parole is a very acceptable punishment.

I feel that once murder is done, any notion that someone may be considered a minor flies out the window.  A 15 year-old having sex with another 15 year-old I have no problem with (well, yeah I do) but I just don't see a 15 year-old being competent to make a decision to have sex with a 30 year-old when their parents will be the ones getting sued if something happens.


Fair enough.

age of consent around here is 14, regardless of how old the other "partner" is.

They don't HAVE to.  I didn't.  But there is a common perception that without a college education, a good job will be out of reach.

It is true that many employers in America put too much emphasis on pieces of paper and not enough on skills and qualifications.  But that isn't always the case.

Liberal arts education is a classist scam.  An undergrad degree is virtually meaningless.  The reason the establishment sells the universal need for college education is to disguise the fact that America is being fired as a nation.  First the came for the textile workers, then they came for industrial manufacturing, now they're shipping away engineering and accounting.  You can't run an economy on Wal-Mart and interior design.

We Americans must kill the myth that business executives are intelligent and corporations are efficient.  Time to find a new paradigm for managing our economy.  The more power we give corporations over economic policy, the worse our lives get!

Liberal arts education is a classist scam.  An undergrad degree is virtually meaningless.  The reason the establishment sells the universal need for college education is to disguise the fact that America is being fired as a nation.  First the came for the textile workers, then they came for industrial manufacturing, now they're shipping away engineering and accounting.  You can't run an economy on Wal-Mart and interior design.

We Americans must kill the myth that business executives are intelligent and corporations are efficient.  Time to find a new paradigm for managing our economy.  The more power we give corporations over economic policy, the worse our lives get!


I wouldn't say all undergrad degrees are meaningless. Associates of Applied Sciences are for specific trades and they are very helpful. In certain fields its required to get one to work in it. Others only require a certificate, however if you have the A.A.S. you get priority over the other with just a certificate in most cases or if not that you often get started at a higher pay grade.

I wouldn't say all undergrad degrees are meaningless. Associates of Applied Sciences are for specific trades and they are very helpful. In certain fields its required to get one to work in it. Others only require a certificate, however if you have the A.A.S. you get priority over the other with just a certificate in most cases or if not that you often get started at a higher pay grade.

I was refering more to points a made in an earlier post.  An "efficient" economy, according to corporate America, ultimately renders 80% of the American workforce redundant.  Therefore, we let our jabbering job-gnosticators tell us that we can't find good jobs because we didn't go to college, or if we did go to college, we didn't get the right kind of degree, or if we did get the right degree, we didn't pursue an advanced degree.  And we as a society continually swallow this BS (that doesn't stand for Bachelor's of Science) instead of confronting the very real and pathological problem that a grown man or woman of nineteen cannot go out and earn a living.
::)

What's puzziling to me is that there are so many more people going to college these days, yet universities and colleges are cutting tenure-track professor positions like nobody's business, in favour of part time associate professors who are not required to be given benefits. Universities are acting like Wal-Mart.

Not trying to be rude but a lot of people who most definitely are not grown adults consider themselves to be. Not saying that about you, but I just wonder what about yourself makes you inclined to say that?

Btw, I turn 18 January 14th. I'm 2 years 2 days older.  ;D


Happy 18th :)

I feel that I am as conscious as I will ever be, plus I'm like 5 foot 10 or 11  ;D

Of course, like anyone I am also immature in some ways.

I had a college roommate who we called "Stachmo" because of his proclivity for young girls.

Eventually he got 2 women preggers at the same time.  ;D