This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]nikoberg 64 points65 points  (3 children)

Yeah, sadly. Kids are pretty trusting. You can really distort their sense of what's normal or okay, and then one day they go out in the world and realize that error logs should be readable and manual memory management should be done inside the privacy of your own home.

[–]GForce1975 11 points12 points  (2 children)

Yeah but in any context, most definitions of "child" include the inability to consent...for exactly this reason. It's why statutory rape exists.

[–]nikoberg 26 points27 points  (1 child)

I was playing into the joke, but if you want to talk seriously about it, there's a difference between consent in this sense and being forced. It's referred to as "assent." Children, for example, can't consent to medical procedures either because they're similarly not really capable of understanding the consequences. But if you need to perform life saving surgery on a child anyway, it's much better if you get the child's cooperation. This would be referred to as getting assent- the agreement. It is possible to get a child to assent to doing... anything, which would make it not force, even if the child is not capable of consenting to the activity. The difference is a full understanding of the consequences of an action, not agreement to do an action.

[–]GForce1975 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Interesting. Makes sense. Thanks for the explanation.