Kaitlyn Hunt: Civil Rights Hero or Sexual Predator?

Rallick wrote:

Is there any truth to the thing I read that the parents of the victim (for want of a better word) deliberately waited until Kaitlyn was 18 and then got the law involved? They knew about the whole thing for some time before then. Apparently they didn't like the fact that their girl was into other girls, and this was their way of punishing the girl they thought responsible for this. It seems rather underhanded, if perfectly legal, if that's how it went down.

Ha! I literally just Googled that because I was confused myself.

Hunt turned 18 on August 14, 2012. Hunt's mother said the two started dating before then, but other reports said that the two began dating in November 2012. Though that date could be confused with when their relationship became known to the younger girl's parents. Both girls played on their school's basketball team and "near the end of the year" the coach found out that the two were dating. At that point Hunt was kicked off the team and the coach notified the other girl's parents about the relationship.

Charges were filed by the younger girl's parents on February 16, 2013.

I find it difficult to accept that the younger girl's parents would be so horrified to find out that their daughter, a freshman, was dating a senior that they had to get the police involved. Nor, I imagine, would the coach have even thought to mention the relationship to the parents if Hunt had been a boy.

OG_slinger wrote:

I find it difficult to accept that the younger girl's parents would be so horrified to find out that their daughter, a freshman, was dating a senior that they had to get the police involved. Nor, I imagine, would the coach have even thought to mention the relationship to the parents if Hunt had been a boy.

I think a lot of parents would be bothered by their freshman child dating a senior if they knew they were having sex.

Crispus wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:

I find it difficult to accept that the younger girl's parents would be so horrified to find out that their daughter, a freshman, was dating a senior that they had to get the police involved. Nor, I imagine, would the coach have even thought to mention the relationship to the parents if Hunt had been a boy.

I think a lot of parents would be bothered by their freshman child dating a senior if they knew they were having sex.

And, yet, it happens every day and the republic is still intact, and, thankfully, we don't have prisons filled with 18-year-olds who were put away for having sex with their freshman boyfriend or girlfriend.

You should if the law were being applied equally.

Crispus wrote:

I think a lot of parents would be bothered by their freshman child dating a senior if they knew they were having sex.

I would be a rare parent who wouldn't be bothered finding out that their precious snowflake was having sex as a teenager.

But there's a rather large difference between being bothered and calling the police to have their child's boyfriend/girlfriend arrested and charged with a sex crime.

So how young is too young for a child to be having sex with an adult before you would react and take action? 13? 12?

While it is entirely possible the young girl's parents are reacting to the gay thing (which would be a horrible reason) I would react in exactly the same manner. I want anyone taking advantage of my child prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I have no sympathy about how it affects their life. They should know better.

OG_slinger wrote:

I find it difficult to accept that the younger girl's parents would be so horrified to find out that their daughter, a freshman, was dating a senior that they had to get the police involved. Nor, I imagine, would the coach have even thought to mention the relationship to the parents if Hunt had been a boy.

I'd agree with your perspective, except that the statistics disagree with you.

The more relevant question here is how old would you say is an "adult," and at the limits of this arbitrary transition, are you willing to make concessions to allow for the arbitrary nature of this definition? A person 17 years and 11 months old is not materially more wise or emotionally mature than that same person one month later, particularly if all he'd been doing all month is playing CoD over the summer.

We call one an adult and the other a child as a matter of convenience, but let's not pretend that it's more than that; or be blinded by our own arbitrary limitations by forgetting that they're arbitrary and self-imposed.

The real limitation is twofold: physical sexual maturity, and emotional capability. Physical sexual maturity and emotional maturity both exist on a bell curve. Some people don't finish puberty until after age 21 or so. Some people finish at age 8, though that's considered pathologic at the present time. Emotional and intellectual maturity are other factors. Being an old guy myself, I can say with some deal of a authority that I am a LOT more canny, wise, and capable than my own self 15 years ago. The gulf between myself and a woman about my state when I was 23 cannot be overstated. I'd have run rings around myself. Between 14 and 18? Eh. Not that different. But one is supposedly taking advantage and the other is not? That doesn't compute.

The true issue is, until what age can parents have control of their progeny's sexual activities or lack thereof? In other words, how long does a child's sexual rights belong to his parents?

LarryC wrote:

The true issue is, until what age can parents have control of their progeny's sexual activities or lack thereof? In other words, how long does a child's sexual rights belong to his parents?

That's easy. Legally, until they're 18 or emancipated in much of the US. It may be legal for them to have sex before that, but their parents/guardians are considered to have control.

Nevin73 wrote:

So how young is too young for a child to be having sex with an adult before you would react and take action? 13? 12?

While it is entirely possible the young girl's parents are reacting to the gay thing (which would be a horrible reason) I would react in exactly the same manner. I want anyone taking advantage of my child prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I have no sympathy about how it affects their life. They should know better.

Yeah, this is where things can get fuzzy to me. Is 13 that much different than 14? Probably not. How about 12 to 13? How about 14 to 12 now?

At no age does someone magically get some new knowledge or maturity, so unfortunately we just pick an age and go with it.

obirano wrote:

At no age does someone magically get some new knowledge or maturity, so unfortunately we just pick an age and go with it.

On paper, sure.

But in practice, do we really want to start arresting all the seniors who have participated in anything sexual with someone who is a freshman?

I doubt we have enough prisons to accommodate the aftermath if we do.

Phoenix Rev wrote:
obirano wrote:

At no age does someone magically get some new knowledge or maturity, so unfortunately we just pick an age and go with it.

On paper, sure.

But in practice, do we really want to start arresting all the seniors who have participated in anything sexual with someone who is a freshman?

I doubt we have enough prisons to accommodate the aftermath if we do.

I think one of the things that's missing from this discussion is the 14-year-old's parents pressed charges after repeatedly telling Hunt to stay away, and after Hunt helped the 14-year-old run away for the weekend. I recognize 18-year-olds aren't the brightest when it comes to love, but at a certain point they need to take a hint that if you continue to go against your lover's parents you just might get the smack down. Once again, as a boy growing up in the South, this was pretty much drilled into my head and one of the reasons why I didn't go after a particular girl until she was 16, even though I was only 17 at the time.

jdzappa wrote:

I think one of the things that's missing from this discussion is the 14-year-old's parents pressed charges after repeatedly telling Hunt to stay away, and after Hunt helped the 14-year-old run away for the weekend. I recognize 18-year-olds aren't the brightest when it comes to love, but at a certain point they need to take a hint that if you continue to go against your lover's parents you just might get the smack down. Once again, as a boy growing up in the South, this was pretty much drilled into my head and one of the reasons why I didn't go after a particular girl until she was 16, even though I was only 17 at the time.

That may be the case (there seems to be a lot of finger pointing and different claims being made here), but then you are singling out this one specific case because of the circumstances and wanting to bring the full weight of the law down on the 18-year-old. However, the conversation above has centered around imposing that law on any 18-year-old (an "adult" by legal definition) who has any sexual contact with someone who is a minor. Again, that is all well and good, but then there shouldn't be any complaining about the cost of expanding the courts to handle the sudden influx of cases of the senior football captain performing cunnilingus on the freshman JV cheerleader as well as the cost to punish them.

The odd thing is that we have done a completely horrendous job of helping teens deal with the vagaries of being walking hormones and now we think that threatening them with arrest and potential incarceration is going to be the cold shower that keeps them from being what they, which is horny teenagers.

Phoenix Rev wrote:
obirano wrote:

At no age does someone magically get some new knowledge or maturity, so unfortunately we just pick an age and go with it.

On paper, sure.

But in practice, do we really want to start arresting all the seniors who have participated in anything sexual with someone who is a freshman?

I doubt we have enough prisons to accommodate the aftermath if we do.

I don't know. Wasn't offering a solution, just saying that I'm not sure how we decide what is 'right' and 'wrong'.

jdzappa wrote:
Phoenix Rev wrote:
obirano wrote:

At no age does someone magically get some new knowledge or maturity, so unfortunately we just pick an age and go with it.

On paper, sure.

But in practice, do we really want to start arresting all the seniors who have participated in anything sexual with someone who is a freshman?

I doubt we have enough prisons to accommodate the aftermath if we do.

I think one of the things that's missing from this discussion is the 14-year-old's parents pressed charges after repeatedly telling Hunt to stay away, and after Hunt helped the 14-year-old run away for the weekend. I recognize 18-year-olds aren't the brightest when it comes to love, but at a certain point they need to take a hint that if you continue to go against your lover's parents you just might get the smack down. Once again, as a boy growing up in the South, this was pretty much drilled into my head and one of the reasons why I didn't go after a particular girl until she was 16, even though I was only 17 at the time.

Yeah, this is why I don't think it's entirely wrong that the police and state got involved. The runaway event happened a few months before the event that started the legal proceedings happened. I think it's the younger girl's parent's last ditch effort to stop a relationship they don't approve of (and their disapproval does seem to be entirely due to the age difference, not orientation). The plea bargain Kaitlyn was offered sounded very reasonable (as an uninvolved party), but some of the conditions were staying away from the girl for a year and having to plead no contest to two counts of child abuse. I can certainly understand why Kaitlyn wouldn't want to stay away or say that her relationship was child abuse.

I started dating my (now) wife against her mother's wishes (who has since come around), so I have quite a bit of sympathy for Kaitlyn.
Edit - that said, I still can't condone the whole 18-year-year-old-having-sex-with-a-14-year-old thing, so I my sympathy doesn't mean I think no action should be taken against her or that the younger girls parents are wrong for what they're doing. I think Kaitlyn should have taken the plea bargain, as much as she would hate not being able to see her girlfriend. I don't think she'll get (and certainly doesn't deserve) the maximum penalty she faces if she loses her case (and considering that she's already made statements to the police that she did have sex with the girl, I don't see how she won't lose). Maximum penalties tend to be disproportionately large to scare people into taking plea bargains.

LouZiffer wrote:
LarryC wrote:

The true issue is, until what age can parents have control of their progeny's sexual activities or lack thereof? In other words, how long does a child's sexual rights belong to his parents?

That's easy. Legally, until they're 18 or emancipated in much of the US. It may be legal for them to have sex before that, but their parents/guardians are considered to have control.

Not so much. A parent has "control" until their child can consent for themselves. Each state has their own laws about consent. In Florida (where this happened) the age of consent is 18, but there's also an age gap provision that allows a 16 year old to consent if the other person is 16-23. So if this had happened two years later, when Kaitlyn was 20 and the girl 16, there'd be no legal action the parents could take.

jdzappa wrote:

I think one of the things that's missing from this discussion is the 14-year-old's parents pressed charges after repeatedly telling Hunt to stay away, and after Hunt helped the 14-year-old run away for the weekend. I recognize 18-year-olds aren't the brightest when it comes to love, but at a certain point they need to take a hint that if you continue to go against your lover's parents you just might get the smack down. Once again, as a boy growing up in the South, this was pretty much drilled into my head and one of the reasons why I didn't go after a particular girl until she was 16, even though I was only 17 at the time.

Say the ages all you want, but it's still a high school student having a relationship with another high school student. Something that happens all the f*cking time in every high school in the country.

Nothing says you've completely failed as a parent like arresting your kid's high school boyfriend or girlfriend. Teenagers do stupid things, including running away. It's part of what you should expect from a teenager.

What you don't do is charge their significant other with a sex crime because you can't accept that your precious snowflake wants to rebel. Doubly so when it's much more likely that you can't accept that your precious snowflake is a lesbian.

Stengah wrote:

I started dating my (now) wife against her mother's wishes (who has since come around), so I have quite a bit of sympathy for Kaitlyn.
Edit - that said, I still can't condone the whole 18-year-year-old-having-sex-with-a-14-year-old thing, so I my sympathy doesn't mean I think no action should be taken against her or that the younger girls parents are wrong for what they're doing. I think Kaitlyn should have taken the plea bargain, as much as she would hate not being able to see her girlfriend. I don't think she'll get (and certainly doesn't deserve) the maximum penalty she faces if she loses her case (and considering that she's already made statements to the police that she did have sex with the girl, I don't see how she won't lose). Maximum penalties tend to be disproportionately large to scare people into taking plea bargains.

It was a high school freshman involved with a high school senior. While hyping on their ages might make it seem like an actual crime, it was really just one teenager having a relationship with another teenager. I mean would you seriously have your son take a plea bargain that said he committed child abuse just because he dated someone a few years younger?

OG_slinger wrote:
Stengah wrote:

I started dating my (now) wife against her mother's wishes (who has since come around), so I have quite a bit of sympathy for Kaitlyn.
Edit - that said, I still can't condone the whole 18-year-year-old-having-sex-with-a-14-year-old thing, so I my sympathy doesn't mean I think no action should be taken against her or that the younger girls parents are wrong for what they're doing. I think Kaitlyn should have taken the plea bargain, as much as she would hate not being able to see her girlfriend. I don't think she'll get (and certainly doesn't deserve) the maximum penalty she faces if she loses her case (and considering that she's already made statements to the police that she did have sex with the girl, I don't see how she won't lose). Maximum penalties tend to be disproportionately large to scare people into taking plea bargains.

It was a high school freshman involved with a high school senior. While hyping on their ages might make it seem like an actual crime, it was really just one teenager having a relationship with another teenager. I mean would you seriously have your son take a plea bargain that said he committed child abuse just because he dated someone a few years younger?

I have no children at all, so I can only guess how I'd react, but I think it'd depend entirely on their exact ages. If my kid was having sex with a 14 year old, I'd be very disappointed, and if they refused to stop and semi-kidnapped them, I don't think some sort of legal punishment wouldn't be out of the question. It's not that they had a relationship, it's that they had a sexual relationship. If they had kept it in their pants for a few years, I don't think it'd have been an issue.

Stengah wrote:

Not so much. A parent has "control" until their child can consent for themselves. Each state has their own laws about consent. In Florida (where this happened) the age of consent is 18, but there's also an age gap provision that allows a 16 year old to consent if the other person is 16-23. So if this had happened two years later, when Kaitlyn was 20 and the girl 16, there'd be no legal action the parents could take.

You're elaborating on what I've said, though I disagree with a blanket "no control" after age of consent. Like I said, sexual activity can be legal prior to adulthood. However, the parent still has legal control over their child until they're emancipated or reach adulthood. Though they may not have legal options through the courts to specifically target and stop sexual activity, they have plenty of options including relocation of the child and/or family, or requesting a protective order based on perceived threat (not just sex).

Unless there is some kind of evidence that would break child pornography laws, wouldn't the younger girl be able to stop the whole thing by refusing to testify about the sex part? "Your honor, we kissed but did nothing else."

Oso wrote:

Unless there is some kind of evidence that would break child pornography laws, wouldn't the younger girl be able to stop the whole thing by refusing to testify about the sex part? "Your honor, we kissed but did nothing else."

Both the girls have already made statements to the police that they've had sex twice, so I don't think testimony will matter at this point unless.

Don't forget the other aspect of criminal prosecution - deterrence. If an 18 y/o's life is f*cked by the criminal justice system for having sex with a minor then hopefully other 18 y/o's will learn that this behavior is discouraged and that it would be bad if they did the same thing. Men (regardless of sexual preference) have long been taught this lesson. Maybe its time for women (again, regardless of sexual preference) learn the same.

Stengah wrote:

I have no children at all, so I can only guess how I'd react, but I think it'd depend entirely on their exact ages. If my kid was having sex with a 14 year old, I'd be very disappointed, and if they refused to stop and semi-kidnapped them, I don't think some sort of legal punishment wouldn't be out of the question. It's not that they had a relationship, it's that they had a sexual relationship. If they had kept it in their pants for a few years, I don't think it'd have been an issue.

Waving a finger in the faces of teens and telling them to just keep in their pants has been tried for generations and has been, with little doubt, an utter failure.

OG_slinger wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

I think one of the things that's missing from this discussion is the 14-year-old's parents pressed charges after repeatedly telling Hunt to stay away, and after Hunt helped the 14-year-old run away for the weekend. I recognize 18-year-olds aren't the brightest when it comes to love, but at a certain point they need to take a hint that if you continue to go against your lover's parents you just might get the smack down. Once again, as a boy growing up in the South, this was pretty much drilled into my head and one of the reasons why I didn't go after a particular girl until she was 16, even though I was only 17 at the time.

Say the ages all you want, but it's still a high school student having a relationship with another high school student. Something that happens all the f*cking time in every high school in the country.

Nothing says you've completely failed as a parent like arresting your kid's high school boyfriend or girlfriend. Teenagers do stupid things, including running away. It's part of what you should expect from a teenager.

What you don't do is charge their significant other with a sex crime because you can't accept that your precious snowflake wants to rebel. Doubly so when it's much more likely that you can't accept that your precious snowflake is a lesbian.

Stengah wrote:

I started dating my (now) wife against her mother's wishes (who has since come around), so I have quite a bit of sympathy for Kaitlyn.
Edit - that said, I still can't condone the whole 18-year-year-old-having-sex-with-a-14-year-old thing, so I my sympathy doesn't mean I think no action should be taken against her or that the younger girls parents are wrong for what they're doing. I think Kaitlyn should have taken the plea bargain, as much as she would hate not being able to see her girlfriend. I don't think she'll get (and certainly doesn't deserve) the maximum penalty she faces if she loses her case (and considering that she's already made statements to the police that she did have sex with the girl, I don't see how she won't lose). Maximum penalties tend to be disproportionately large to scare people into taking plea bargains.

It was a high school freshman involved with a high school senior. While hyping on their ages might make it seem like an actual crime, it was really just one teenager having a relationship with another teenager. I mean would you seriously have your son take a plea bargain that said he committed child abuse just because he dated someone a few years younger?

I'm guessing you're not a parent, because to me minimalizing something as risky as sex is the same as saying, "oh well, my kid binge drinks and tried meth last week, but I'm sure she'll grow out of it. It's part of growing up right?!?"

My wife is the youngest of her family, so a number of our nieces and nephews are in the 13-15 range. They are all good kids, but I can't see any of them having the emotional maturity to handle a sexual relationship with an adult. Or any sexual relationship for that matter. The law doesn't think young teens are all that mature either - hence the reason they can't hold a real job, drive, vote, drink, etc.

Now, I don't necessarily think Hunt should do 10 years in prison. But I can see the need for potentially harsh penalties for an adult who helps a minor run away, given the large number of teen girls who get trafficked each year.

As far as if my son was in the same situation as Hunt, I'd hope to God I would have stopped the insanity from reaching this point and convinced him to date someone his own age. Barring that, I'd tell him to take the plea deal and just be glad that the girl's dad decided not to leave him floating face first in the Everglades, which given Southern culture is always a possibility.

jdzappa wrote:

I'm guessing you're not a parent, because to me minimalizing something as risky as sex is the same as saying, "oh well, my kid binge drinks and tried meth last week, but I'm sure she'll grow out of it. It's part of growing up right?!?"

Except let's be honest: sex for a 14 year old girl with an 18 year old woman is a lot less risky than sex with another 14 year old boy. edit: That's actually the danger of being a parent when it comes to this kind of discussion--you're very close to the topic and that can prejudice your judgement. There's two sides to that coin.

They are all good kids, but I can't see any of them having the emotional maturity to handle a sexual relationship with an adult.

If you're still in high school, are you *really* an adult for purposes of emotional maturity? Emotional maturity is a mental process, not just a physical one. You don't magically mature when you turn eighteen-and-a-day. We use ages as bright lines because we can't go around making laws for every little situation, but there's another bright line: going to the same high school. I mean, these two could get away with the Sandusky defense--"we were just showering"--and it would be believable.

If we think 18 year olds are adults are that much different, shouldn't the school be treating them differently in all cases? If they're adults, they shouldn't be allowed to shower with fellow under-18 players but they should be allowed to shower with middle aged coaches. Yet that just doesn't seem right, does it?

It's strange to think a coach would be in less legal trouble for having sex with one of their high school players than one of those players will be for having sex with a fellow player.

+++++

Also, another link about the case--here's something written by the father of Hunt:

http://www.xojane.com/issues/kaitlyn...

CheezePavilion wrote:

If we think 18 year olds are adults are that much different, shouldn't the school be treating them differently in all cases? If they're adults, they shouldn't be allowed to shower with fellow under-18 players but they should be allowed to shower with middle aged coaches. Yet that just doesn't seem right, does it?

It's strange to think a coach would be in less legal trouble for having sex with one of their high school players than one of those players will be for having sex with a fellow player.

+++++

Also, another link about the case--here's something written by the father of Hunt:

http://www.xojane.com/issues/kaitlyn...

A couple of thoughts:
- Thanks for posting that link, it was informative.
- It would be strange if a coach showered with any of their players, adult or minor.
- Coaches should expect to incur penalties (though not necessarily criminal) should they sleep with any of their players. The least of which would be that the coach would lose his/her job.
- A couple of things struck me reading the article from Kaitlyn's dad. First, I do not agree with the minor's parents seeking police action before even talking to Kaitlyn's parents. As much as I am defensive of my son, I would probably issue a warning to stay away first before more severe action is taken.

This quote really made me think:

Kate has offered to permanently cease contact and leave the state if charges are dropped, but that offer has been rejected by the prosecutor and the girlfriend's parents.

Again, I may be okay with this resolution, depending on all of the circumstances around the case. But it might also be out of the parents' hands. Of course if someone tried to coerce my child into running away I would want them to fry. But then my household isn't hostile to different ways of life.

Well...I was a 14 year old girl. I was regularly asked out by guys twice my age or more, and high school seniors started asking me out when I was in 7th grade. I would have loved to go out with them, but my parents sent me to convent school, which really was probably best for everyone.

Here's the thing; 14 year olds are quite capable of desiring sex. Even if they don't know what it is. They're pretty sure that tingly bits can get more tingly...but the tingly certainly makes you want to explore why, how, when, and can we do it again? The problem is, that 14 year olds have zero common sense, absolutely no concept of consequences and are pretty much hormones on feet disengaged from a brain. They cannot be trusted, is my point.

By 18, that's no longer true...as much. An 18 year old is significantly older than a 14 year old. But they still aren't rational actors. Especially about sex. But, age of consent isn't a secret. If an 18 year old chooses to have sex with a 14 year old, no matter how willing that 14 year old is, that 18 year old is still doing something illegal. (And something I would consider ethically tricky to defend...and I say that as a 14 year old that could have found myself sexually active, had my parents not been so pro-active in finding a chastity belt of killer nuns.)

Cases like this are agnostic as to the gender of the participants. She's not a civil rights activist, she diddled a kid, the kid's parents overreacted, and she's now facing the draconian and absurd legislated puritanical punishments. In cases like this, I consider the consequences completely irrational, and the very idea that she'd need to be on a registered offender's list is obscene.

CheezePavilion wrote:
jdzappa wrote:

I'm guessing you're not a parent, because to me minimalizing something as risky as sex is the same as saying, "oh well, my kid binge drinks and tried meth last week, but I'm sure she'll grow out of it. It's part of growing up right?!?"

Except let's be honest: sex for a 14 year old girl with an 18 year old woman is a lot less risky than sex with another 14 year old boy. edit: That's actually the danger of being a parent when it comes to this kind of discussion--you're very close to the topic and that can prejudice your judgement. There's two sides to that coin.

They are all good kids, but I can't see any of them having the emotional maturity to handle a sexual relationship with an adult.

If you're still in high school, are you *really* an adult for purposes of emotional maturity? Emotional maturity is a mental process, not just a physical one. You don't magically mature when you turn eighteen-and-a-day. We use ages as bright lines because we can't go around making laws for every little situation, but there's another bright line: going to the same high school. I mean, these two could get away with the Sandusky defense--"we were just showering"--and it would be believable.

If we think 18 year olds are adults are that much different, shouldn't the school be treating them differently in all cases? If they're adults, they shouldn't be allowed to shower with fellow under-18 players but they should be allowed to shower with middle aged coaches. Yet that just doesn't seem right, does it?

It's strange to think a coach would be in less legal trouble for having sex with one of their high school players than one of those players will be for having sex with a fellow player.

+++++

Also, another link about the case--here's something written by the father of Hunt:

http://www.xojane.com/issues/kaitlyn...

Ill echo the other sentiments that it was an interesting article, and that Hunt sounds like a decent enough kid. It would seem in everyone's best interest to let her leave the state and cease all contact. That being said, I still agree with Duckideva that an 18-year-old is still going to have a lot more maturity than a 14-year-old who lets face it is only a few months out of jr high. I also feel the whole LGBT martyr angle is a bit overplayed.

Honest question: is "maturity" here being used as a catch-all for "I approve of it," or is there something specific? What particular mental and emotional tools is an average 18 yo American supposed to have that an average 14 yo American would not? Is that taught in high school or something?

LarryC wrote:

Honest question: is "maturity" here being used as a catch-all for "I approve of it," or is there something specific? What particular mental and emotional tools is an average 18 yo American supposed to have that an average 14 yo American would not? Is that taught in high school or something?

I don't think that anyone is saying 18-year-olds are full of wisdom and life experience. But American law states they can drive, vote, work a full-time job, be drafted and die for their country. It's also the cut-off age for when someone committing a crime is automatically sent to the harsher adult system rather than being punished as a juvenile.

I think life experience also plays a huge role. At 14, I wasn't even allowed to go on dates alone. By 18, I was a lot more self-sufficient and understanding of both what I wanted in a relationship and how to not be a total selfish prick. I'd argue that the 4 years of adolescence is the biggest transition of a human's life besides newborn to toddler of course.

I'd be curious to hear what it's like in the Philippines - are teens considered adults much earlier?

We live in extended families so you get exposed to people dating and being given and receiving dating advice from about age 7. Sometimes, older people making really bad dating decisions serve as very convincing object lessons. You don't exactly get shielded from that sort of thing.

All that said, I myself was forbidden from having any kind of sex (even making out) until after 18, and this was strictly enforced through a system of constant adult supervision. You're literally under someone's wing every minute of every day. It's not like you have all that much spare time to devote to romance anyway. Our childhood is seen as training, not as an idyllic pastoral paradise.

Romantic liaisons are overseen by a third party, which is traditional even for older people. It's for everyone's peace of mind.

We're not all like this. Poorer folk are notorious for neglecting their kids, and richer folk are more like you - more Western.

Offhand I'd say I did most of that transitioning between age 10 to 14, corresponding to the onset of puberty. Here's something you might find intriguing. In Anne of Green Gables, Anne transitions to romance-ready at about the same time period. She delays finding a beau for later only because of her studies.

TMI rambling. Read at your own peril.

Spoiler:

"Adult" the way you say it is variable. We don't mean the same thing and marks are different based on what you're talking about. Children are expected to be economic assets from as early as age as they can manage. It's both earning for the family and on-the-job training. Children are expected to learn how to cook, do laundry, take care of babies and small children, and generally get by before age 14.

My own kids are now 6 and 8. They clean the house by themselves and can cook their own breakfast (generally pancakes). Their latest project was making boxes for storage and gifting and making cakes and cookies for entertaining guests. I recall my own sister (the eldest) at age 14 being routinely assigned to plan, cook, and supervise the cleanup of a dinner for 4.

There's a saying we have here. "Pwede nang mag-asawa!" The phrase means that you've completed training and can not only make it on your own but can also potentially support and manage a household with a spouse - by yourself if necessary.

As for dating and sex, it varies. Some people have kids at 14. It's considered kind of tragic since the couple isn't considered ready for the situation financially and educationally; though they are sort of expected to know how to keep house and manage themselves. Around my locality and economic class, 21 is about the age people expect you to start dating - the first time you actually have spare time to do something other than train and sleep.

Going back to our topic, is it dating experience from 14 to 16 that makes the difference? This is presumably with kids their own age, yes? Under supervision?