Editing Age of consent (section)

===Gender of participants===
There is debate as to whether the gender of those involved should lead to different treatment of the sexual encounter, in law or in practice. Traditionally, age of consent laws regarding vaginal intercourse were often meant to protect the chastity of unmarried girls.<ref name="chnm.gmu.edu"/> Many feminists and social campaigners in the 1970s have objected to the social importance of virginity, and have also attempted to change the stereotypes of female passivity and male aggression; demanding that the law protect children from exploitation regardless of their gender, rather than dealing with concerns of chastity. This has led to gender-neutral laws in many jurisdictions.<ref name="chnm.gmu.edu"/> On the other hand, there is an opposing view which argues that the act of vaginal intercourse is an "unequal act" for males and females, due to issues such as pregnancy, increased risk of STDs,<ref>UNFPA writes that "Biologically, women's risk of acquiring sexually transmitted infections during unprotected sexual relations is two to four times that of men."[http://www.unfpa.org/resources/giving-special-attention-girls-and-adolescents] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150707005611/http://www.unfpa.org/resources/giving-special-attention-girls-and-adolescents|date=7 July 2015}}</ref> and risk of physical injury if the girl is too young and not physically ready. In the US, in ''[[Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County|Michael M. v. Superior Ct.450 U.S. 464 (1981)]]'' it was ruled that the double standard of offering more legal protection to girls is valid because "the Equal Protection Clause does not mean that the physiological differences between men and women must be disregarded".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/450/464/case.html|title=Michael M. v. Superior Ct. :: 450 U.S. 464 (1981) :: Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center|work=Justia Law|access-date=29 June 2015}}</ref>

Traditionally, many age of consent laws dealt primarily with men engaging in sexual acts with underage girls and boys (the latter acts often falling under [[sodomy]] and [[buggery]] laws). This means that in some legal systems, issues of women having sexual contact with underage partners were rarely acknowledged. For example, until 2000, in the UK, before the [[Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000]], there was no statutory age of consent for [[lesbian]] sex.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1045383.stm|title=BBC News—UK—Q and A: The age of consent|publisher=BBC News|date=29 November 2000|access-date=29 June 2015}}</ref> In [[New Zealand]], before 2005, there were no age of consent laws dealing with women having sex with underage boys.<ref>"In respect of sexual conduct with a young person aged under 16, the bill [Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) which became law in 2005 [http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/legislation/bills/00DBHOH_BILL5923_1/crimes-amendment-bill-no-2] significantly toughens the law. The loophole protecting women against being charged with sexual offending against children is removed".{{cite web |date=12 April 2005 |title=Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2) – Second Reading, Instruction to Committee, In Committee |url=http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/debates/debates/47HansD_20050414_00000206/crimes-amendment-bill-no-2-%E2%80%94-second-reading-instruction |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150609123151/https://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/debates/debates/47HansD_20050414_00000206/crimes-amendment-bill-no-2-%E2%80%94-second-reading-instruction |archive-date=9 June 2015 |access-date=8 June 2015 |website=parliament.nz}}</ref> Previously, in Fiji, male offenders of child sexual abuse could receive up to life imprisonment, whilst female offenders would receive up to seven years.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304495447|last1=Whitehead|first1=John|last2=Roffee|first2=James|title=Child Sexual Abuse in Fiji: Authority, Risk Factors and Responses}}</ref> Situations like these have been attributed to societal views on traditional [[gender roles]], and to constructs of [[male sexuality]] and [[female sexuality]]; according to E Martellozzo, "[V]iewing females as perpetrators of sexual abuse goes against every stereotype that society has of women: women as mothers and caregivers and not as people who abuse and harm".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cybercrimejournal.com/elenaetal2010ijcc.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://www.cybercrimejournal.com/elenaetal2010ijcc.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=Online child sexual abuse by female offenders: An Exploratory study|publisher=International Journal of Cyber Criminology|last1=Martellozzo|first1=Elena|last2=Nehring|first2=Daniel|last3=Taylor|first3=Helen|date=2010|access-date=25 August 2015}}</ref> [[Alissa Nutting]] argues that women are not acknowledged as perpetrators of sex crimes because society does not accept that women have an autonomous sexuality of their own.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://cultmagazine.com.au/2014/08/festival-dangerous-ideas-top-10/ |title=CULT Magazine FESTIVAL OF DANGEROUS IDEAS TOP 10|work=CULT Magazine |access-date=29 June 2015 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150609123104/http://cultmagazine.com.au/2014/08/festival-dangerous-ideas-top-10/ |archive-date=9 June 2015}}</ref>