Ok, here’s the scenario I want to present:
My boyfriend is five months older than me. When he turns eighteen and I am still a minor, will we be able to have sexual contact legally?
The thing is, in Massachusetts (as far as I know, anyway), which is where I live, the legal age of consent is 16. Does this fact have anything to do with it?
Thanks to anyone altruistic enough to answer this question,
SonicDeathMonkeyCome on up to Canada, where the age of consent is 14 
Better yet, I heard that the Netherlands was considering lowering their age of consent to 12. Anyone know if this happened, or am I hallucinating again?
(Disclaimer: I love the Netherlands, I’d love to live in Delft, but I’m not into boinking 12-year-olds. Even if it’s legal.)
Oh, one more thing: I love your nickname, SonicDeathMonkey 
I’m sure a lawyer will come by in a moment to give a more definitive answer, but I can tell you that every statutory rape law that I have ever heard of takes the relative ages of the parties into account. As a practical matter it would be impossible to enforce the scenario that you describe.
My understanding has always been that you can only get in trouble for having sex with someone under 18 if you are over 20, or 21 (can’t recall exactly). This is so that people in this situation aren’t breaking the law.
You answered your own question. The only relevant question is the age of consent which is 16 in Mass.
It does get more convoluted in other states.
For what province? I’d have to look it up, but I remember from my law class that in Ontario it’s 16.
Wooba, you obviously didn’t pay much attention in your law class. In Canada age of consent is a federal issue as is all criminal law. As such 14 is the age of consent in all provinces.
I paid plenty of attention, I was just given bad information…
I stand corrected…
Hmmmm I guess sometimes "Sixteen will get you 20.
As potential, incipient jailbait the following should be of particular interest to you.
http://www.ageofconsent.com/massachusetts.htm
"GENERAL LAWS OF MASSACHUSETTS
Chapter 272: Section 4. Inducing person under 18 to have sexual intercourse.
Section 4. Whoever induces any person under eighteen of chaste life to have unlawful sexual intercourse shall be punished as provided in the preceding section.
EDITORS NOTE: The above section was delivered via email to the research department and has been verified with the State of Massachusetts. Read the terminology carefully. How does the prosecutor validate “chaste” or lack thereof. It is probably a good “threat”, but I would be surprised to see it hold up on appeal. Secondly, in order for the defense to prove that the “victim” was not chaste, the defense would have the right to subpoena all previous sexual partners and close friends in an effort to disprove that the victim was chaste. I would doubt that any “victim” or the parents of would allow such an intrusive action. Although we have made an entry into the chart to reflect this finding, we still believe the age of consent to be 16. Sure wish we would hear from attorneys licensed in Massachusetts …
Updated 04-2001: The email we receive …
“The fact that you do not believe that the above law can be put into practice, nonetheless it is the law, and you are doing your visitors a great disservice by insisting that the age of consent in Massachusetts is sixteen, when anyone who can read can see that it is eighteen. As long as a law remains on the books it CAN be enforced. Several weeks ago a women was arrested in Wisconsin for having supplied condoms to he thirteen-year-old son because she knew that he was engaging in sexual intercourse with his girlfriend. She was charged with promoting child abuse as, legally, the boy was being “abused” by his girlfriend because he (like his girlfriend) was under sixteen. A law may be stupid (I think the age-of-consent laws ARE stupid), but just because you don’t believe that a “victim” or his or her parents would allow the defense to subpoena all previous sexual partners and close friends in an effort to disprove that the victim was chaste, doesn’t mean that
the law doesn’t exist. The age of consent in Massachusetts is eighteen, as spelled out in Chapter 272, Section 4, of the General Laws of Massachusetts, and will remain as such until this law is repealed.”
EDITOR: We will let his comments speak for themselves"
etc. etc.
Your best bet is to check the laws in your own jurisdiction. If, as you say, the age of consent is 16 you’re legal once you achieve that age. Both parties, must of course be of age.
However, I’m mainly posting to correct bnorton’s premise that all jurisdictions take the relative age of the parties into consideration. THis is most emphatically not the case. Many states do not (my state, Michigan, the age of consent is 16, and yes, even if the two parties are only 2 months apart in age, the elder can be charged). Which of course, leaves the question open ‘what if they’re both under age?’ and the answer will also probably vary. In my experience (I hasten to add that I work with offenders, not that I routinely have sexual contact with minors), the elder of the two will risk being charged.
gtzasker00
Not necessarily so…
Here in progressive Wisconsin:
http://www.beloitdailynews.com/497/3wis30.htm
IIRC, he eventually had to serve probation, and there was a firestorm a bit later because Wisconsin’s ‘manditory registration as a sex offender’ laws came into play. My memory is sketchy, but I cannot seem to find any more about this.
My God! This is insane!
I lived in Massachussetts as recently as four years ago, and the age of consent was, and I’m sure still is, 18. In fact, in MA if the boyfriend is 18, and the girl 17, he still might be charged with statutory rape. That happened to a young employee of my father’s, (18 with a 17 year old girlfriend whose dad didn’t like him) though I think he got off on probation. I’d check the law very carefully if I were you, you don’t want your boyfriend arrested on that charge, too.
One other cautionary point as I’m thinking about it. Often when we’re talking about ‘sex’ and the las, folks tend to think of sexual intercourse. However, the way the laws are written, they can cover a wide range of other behavior. In MI (again, check in your own jurisdiction), touching of the thighs, breast, buttocks, genitals w/o penetration still is a degree of Criminal sexual conduct, and of course if the person is under age, you get to register as a child molester (and it’s viewable on the web, you’d have restrictions about where you can live, work etc.). definately something to avoid.
I did a quick review of the Mass. criminal statutes and agree with ageofconsent that the age is 16 though the statute is convoluted. I would also refer to the definition of rape contained in Chapter 277, section 36:
I am not an american lawyer and these statutes can be confusing but I am comforted by press reports from just a few years ago regarding Michael Kennedy and his baby sitter. A quick search shows that all the newspapers in Mass. seem to agree that the age of consent was 16.
Though many states do have exemptions for persons within a certain age of the young person Mass statutes make no such distinctions. In theory two 15 year olds going at it would both be comitting criminal acts.
In my quick search I also came accross a 36 year old police officer who had some problems with his 16 year old girl friend. Mom tried to have him charged under the chapter 272 statute astro cited but it seems the prosecutor declined. This is a tricky statute to charge under as chaste means: A person who has never voluntarily had sexual intercourse outside of marriage such as unmarried virgins. Section 11 also requires: A person shall not be convicted under sections 2, 4 and 6 upon the evidence of one witness only, unless his testimony is corroborated in a material particular, and prosecution for a violation of any of said sections shall not be commenced more than one year after the commission of the crime.
There really is something wrong with a country where teenagers need to consult with lawyers before dating.
Just to lay the Canada thing to rest:
Legal age is 18 for
For everything else for everybody, it’s 14. (Yes, that means that between the ages of 14 and 18, you can do it but you can’t have pictures of it. My roommate, who works in a magazine shop, once had to refuse to sell a porn magazine to a pregnant woman because she was under 18.)
Isn’t there a US federal law regarding crossing a state line to engage in sexual activity with anyone under the age of 18?
I think the insane part is a high school senior and a 15 year old having sexual relations.
It’s not quite that simple. Anal sex is legal in Canada only if you don’t get caught. See the Criminal Code of Canada, Sec. 159 at http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-46/35943.html. It basically says that if anyone happens to observe you having consensual anal sex, you can be thrown in prison for up to ten years.
Now to consent, you must be 18 years of age or older, or the spouse of the person you are having anal sex with. Since you need be only 13 (IIRC) to be married, this gets you around the age-18 limitation.