To take part in discussions on talkSFU, please apply for membership (SFU email id required).
Anal Sex Law in Canada
While I was chatting on the shoutbox and browsing Canada's Criminal Code, I came up on a rather surprising discovery...
According to Canada's Criminal Code Part 5 (SEXUAL OFFENCES, PUBLIC MORALS AND DISORDERLY CONDUCT) Section 159...
Unless I misunderstood the wording, I think it means that Anal Sex is illegal if one of the partner is under 18 or the partner are not married.
This is quite a surprising find. I know these sex laws are put into place to protect minors against pedophiles and predators. However, if one of the partner is under 18 when they performed anal sex, they can still be charged. Meaning, an under 18 teenage couples can be charged with a sexual offense if they performed anal sex. Also, a couple can be charged with sexual offense if one of the partner is under 18.
I am not a lawyer. However, I know a few of our members are sexually active since they were teens (thanks to the virginity thread). Therefore, if you performed anal sex before you were 18, I suggest you keep quite about it and probably destroy all existing record.
Since our age of consent has already been set to 16, I don't understand why it is still illegal to perform anal sex until you are 18. Shouldn't our government catch this legal "loophole" and close this already?
BTW, I also know there is the "husband and wife" wording problem because same-sex marriage is already legal in Canada since 2005, but I want to focus this thread on the age issue.
According to Canada's Criminal Code Part 5 (SEXUAL OFFENCES, PUBLIC MORALS AND DISORDERLY CONDUCT) Section 159...
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/C-46/bo-ga:l_V//en#anchorbo-ga:l_VAnal intercourse
159. (1) Every person who engages in an act of anal intercourse is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Exception
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to any act engaged in, in private, between
(a) husband and wife, or
(b) any two persons, each of whom is eighteen years of age or more,
both of whom consent to the act.
Unless I misunderstood the wording, I think it means that Anal Sex is illegal if one of the partner is under 18 or the partner are not married.
This is quite a surprising find. I know these sex laws are put into place to protect minors against pedophiles and predators. However, if one of the partner is under 18 when they performed anal sex, they can still be charged. Meaning, an under 18 teenage couples can be charged with a sexual offense if they performed anal sex. Also, a couple can be charged with sexual offense if one of the partner is under 18.
I am not a lawyer. However, I know a few of our members are sexually active since they were teens (thanks to the virginity thread). Therefore, if you performed anal sex before you were 18, I suggest you keep quite about it and probably destroy all existing record.
Since our age of consent has already been set to 16, I don't understand why it is still illegal to perform anal sex until you are 18. Shouldn't our government catch this legal "loophole" and close this already?
BTW, I also know there is the "husband and wife" wording problem because same-sex marriage is already legal in Canada since 2005, but I want to focus this thread on the age issue.
Comments
This is one of those laws such as it is illegal to "pretend to practice witchcraft" which is in the same section as using a fake ID. As well, you can get a life sentence in jail for "alarming the queen."
if the couple is married, age restriction is not considered as long as it is consented upon
its related to 'the age of protection for exploitive sexual activity' (18)
which includes sexual activity involving prostitution, pornography; anal sex also falls under that umbrella
to the best of my understanding, i believe it holds true for blowjobs as well, its 18+ since its under the exploitive sexual activity umbrella too
basically anything beyond vaginal sex is subject to the exploitive sexual activity inclusion
I like how the consenting part is there too. Its like, some girl consents to vaginal sex and gets raped in the butt, but will not testify to being "raped", therefore they charge the guy for anal sex. Sounds flawless to me
But yah, like jaydub said, not enforced
Don't get me wrong, I know our police force have more important things to do than to police what goes on in my bedroom. But then again, a law is a law and if I break it, I can get persecuted. Also, even if the police or the DA (Crown Persecutor) is not willing to persecute me, can the girl's parent still bring me to court?
BTW, since I want this to be more of an informal discussion than a debate, I am moving this to General Discussion.
And randomuser, I have. But I'm badass.
What I wonder though, some couples film themselves doing it. While the relationship was going fine and dandy, nothing will come of it. One of the sex fetishes is rape fantasy where its pretty much a rape roleplay. Even without that, even a submissive/passive female, could potentially claim it wasn't consensual (and pretend to not know of the existence of the camcorder) once the relationship takes a sour turn.
In a situation like that, where theres a recording of anal sex AND where consent can be questioned, what then? We have the law, evidence, and willing witness.
What I am trying to ask is: Is there a way get someone arrested for a sex crimes nobody is interested in enforcing?
Prosecutors would not persue these cases for that very reason, not to mention the publics reaction.
Sex crime such as rape, statutory rape between a 16 and 35 year old sure, but anal sex between a 16 and 17 year old noone cares. Even then, a parent telling someone that it happened is not enough proof.
What if I went around telling people we had sex when I was 17, thats not enough proof to constitute anything.
What I am trying to say is that as long as Part 5 Section 159 still exists, I feel that I can still be persecuted and I thus don't feel comfortable doing it. What I am suggesting is that the the age for anal intercourse should be lowered to 16, Canada's current age of consent.
And no, I don't think anybody would care to enforce that rule. Now, if somebody REALLY wanted to set up us the bomb, then yeah, there's probably a 1 in a billion chance that somebody may be trying to trick you into having anal sex with a 16 year old girl, tape it, show it to the authorities along with their Canadian criminal code in hand, telling them to charge you for unlawful sodomy. But really....what in the hell would be their motive?
At back then, there was a huge issue over whether being gay was outlawed entirely since anal sex between unmarried couples were prohibited.
WHAT MOST PEOPLE DID NOT REALISE at that time was that the exceptions had an "OR", followed by PERSONS OF 18 YEARS OR OLDER.
Basically just goes to show exactly how our law codes have to be ABSOLUTELY precise--and how they can sometimes be misinterpreted if any regular person skims a law code.
But anyhow. this law prohibits any gay teenagers from sexual acts at all. It infringes upon the Bill of Human Rights on THREE accounts under discrimination: Discrimination of gender, discrimination of age, and discrimination of sexual orientation.
Gender in the fact that it allows any lesbians under 18 years of age to engage in sexual activity (no anal required); age in the fact that it discriminates against anyone under 18 years of age; and sexual orientation... well, isn't that obvious?
Anyhow, there are many Criminal Codes in need of revision--but it's a slow process as several sections of our Criminal Code is always being contested with new cases and new precedents--in a way, Crime enables society to update its laws from time to time.
It will probably be a few years before this Anal law becomes really out-dated (teenagers these days)--I wouldn't worry much over it.
You sound all serious about the law but it's really no big deal. It's not like it's strictly enforced or anything like that. Anal sex is a private matter so how will they know that happens? Check everyone's assholes every now and then? I don't find it concerning. Plus, that law is super old.
haha that gives a new meaning to a VI