About two years ago now, I was sitting on a bench in Central Park writing my initial thoughts on what I didn’t know then but would come to know as Youth Rights.

I don’t think I’ll ever remember why she did, but about halfway through the day Greta Thunberg came to mind, and I looked up the voting age in Sweden. And my blood boiled in a way I’ve never experienced in my entire life.

16 years old and one of the most famous and recognizable political activists in the world. 16 years old giving a confident, impassioned, admonishing speech to the fucking UN. 16 years old with no legal right to a voice in her country. No voice to vote for the policies she believed in or the people who might enact them.

My writing, already vitriolic to a fault, managed to become even moreso but with the topic abruptly switched to voting. For the first time in my life, I considered where I’d place the voting age if I could do so unilaterally. Not long into considering it I had a thought that I wrote down immediately, a question I’ve asked well over 100 times at this point with no substantial answer:

When is it reasonable to say to a person, ‘If you’re not at least this old, then I don’t give a fuck what you think’?

And from the moment I had that thought, I have been unable to place the voting age.

  • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    13 hours ago

    The minimum age anyone can do any of these things:

    • Pay taxes
    • Hold a job
    • Get married
    • Sign a contract
    • Join the military

    I think that’s currently something like 12 in the US, which is a huge problem.

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    12 hours ago

    IMO, it should be 16. It should be the earliest age that you can work in a traditional job, or begin service in one’s armed forces. Many right-wing people hate this idea because young people are very left-leaning, but it is unfair to expect someone to contribute to a society that bans them from having a say in its outcome.

    • Alice@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      This was my first thought, but then it occurred to me that if I was voting at 16, I’d almost certainly be voting for who my parents told me to. I’m still not against it but I think we’d need specialized education and tons of PSAs aimed at kids about it, because unless you’re already rebellious, “my house my rules” could easily be extended to voting.

  • RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I think between 16 and 20 is acceptable, but I have one kid who turns 18 a week after the election. So will be almost 22 before they can vote in a presidential election. 19 or 20 before a local or state race.

    So I think 16 makes more sense, because the national races being only every 4 years disenfranchises too many young people, everyone who is 15, 16, or 17 at this election won’t actually get to vote at 18.

  • SlothMama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Honestly I think everything should move to 20.

    Alcohol purchase, consumption. Military conscription, draft, voluntary service Age of majority, marriageable age Voting with automatic voting registration Drug consumption including nicotine, caffeine, and cabinets Driving ( permits at a prior age with supervision )

    We know people’s brains aren’t really formed enough even at 18 to consider people adults, this younger age is a hold over from even younger ages and doesn’t reflect reality.

    People who are not fully developed shouldn’t be able to make decisions with the full weight of adulthood, to take any other position is barbaric.

    • hellabryanstyle@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      We’re definitely not at the point that this brain development science should be affecting policy. Here’s an article from 2022 featuring commentary from several neuroscientists. And here are a couple important quotes:

      “Some 8-year-old brains exhibited a greater ‘maturation index’ than some 25 year old brains,”

      The interpretation of neuroimaging is the most difficult and contentious part; in a 2020 study, 70 different research teams analyzed the same data set and came away with wildly different conclusions.

      And here is a different article written entirely by a neuroscientist and released earlier this year.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Then that’s the age we should be able to vote.

        And if people don’t like it, maybe we outlaw child labor. 🤷‍♀️

      • Vanth@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s 12 in the US for agricultural jobs. That’s when I started corn detassling and tree trimming and filed my first taxes.

        Don’t forget acting too. There are babies and toddlers acting and working for pay.

      • over_clox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I was offered a job at a computer repair shop at age 14. Dude had to retract his offer when I told him my age, he assumed I was 17 or older.

        Mississippi.

        • hellabryanstyle@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          According to this it would have been legal to hire you. There’s a lot of restrictions when it comes to number of hours and time of day that minors are allowed to work though which is probably what they didn’t want to deal with.

          • over_clox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Interesting. I’m not quite sure what the laws were back in 1996, but yeah with school and all, plus the travel distance of over 30 miles, even if it was legal for me to work a few hours a day after school, it wouldn’t have been practical at all.

            Still nice that he offered the job, I was trying to brainstorm and troubleshoot why my first sound card didn’t work. Turned out he got a defective batch, like 3 other customers had the same issues.

            He knew I did all the proper troubleshooting already. Honestly I forget what model sound card it was, but once I proved it didn’t work, he gave me a different card that cost twice as much, for no extra money.

  • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Aside from practical reasons like being able to read and write, I think the age to vote should be as low as possible.

    People are concerned that parents will coerce their kids, but that would happen across the board. It would come out in the wash.

    The most important thing is that folks are civically engaged as young as possible. They are invested in the outcome and exercise their rights early.

    I would say a good starting point would be third grade. Right when you begin learning social studies.

    • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      But it wouldn’t come out in the wash. Crazy people would be incentivized to have even more kids to increase their vote. They already do it for “God’s will”, so why not do it for America?

      • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Yes that’s partly the idea. It doesn’t tip the scale. The idea with lowering the voting age as possible it does come out in the wash, but the benefit is that kids are civically engaged. The hope being that engagement carries over as they get older

  • Zier@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    This is the age you should be able to: vote drink be liable as adult for everything join the military smoke (please don’t)

    One age to do everything. 18 is ‘Adult’, that means no age restriction beyond that. At least until you get to retirement age.

    • sweng@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      What is that based on, though? Why a single age for everything, when it might make sense to have it more “targeted”. For example, wouldn’t it make sense to allow voting in local elections, where things are usually simpler and cause and effect clearer, at a younger age?

      Similarly, why tie drinking regulations, which are based on physiology, to voting age, which has nothing to do with it? You may say it’s because if the person is mature enough to vote they can decide themselves, but there is a huge amount of things I’m not allowed to buy or consume even if I’m allowed to vote, so that argument doesn’t hold (unless you advocate 100% liberalization of everything).

      Having just a single age limit just makes it all seem very arbitrary, which it shouldn’t be.

      • Zier@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        My point is, at a specified age, you are considered an Adult. If you are old enough to die in a war and vote for candidates, you are old enough to drink, own a gun and whatever else. I personally think that 19 or 20 would be a better age for adulthood.

        • sweng@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          you are old enough to drink, own a gun and whatever else

          Does that include e.g. doing hard drugs? Are you also allowed to e.g sell hard drugs, or e.g. potentially harmful products, such as power tools without certain currently legally mandated safety features if the buyer is an adult? Are you allowed to sign away certain rights that you are currently not allowed to sign away, e.g. should an adult be allowed to sign themselves over to slavery without the possibility to undo it?

          • Slippery_Snake874@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            22 hours ago

            I feel like it was pretty obvious they meant you could do everything that’s legal once you reach that age. I don’t think anyone is arguing that laws applying to everyone should just disappear at a certain age.

            • sweng@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              18 hours ago

              But the point is that just because you are old enough to vote, doesn’t mean you are necessarily mature enough to make certain decisions.

              One could well argue that if the reason we are not allowed to heroin is related to health, or crimes due to addiction, then an 18 yo should not be allowed to use it, but a 90 year old would. I would even argue that we might want to allow hard drugs to 80 year olds, who probably can take responsibility by then.

            • sweng@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              18 hours ago

              I’ve already served in the military. What question am I supposed to ask again? Or do I need to re-enlist first? I’m not sure they would accept me at my age anymore.

              • EABOD25@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                17 hours ago

                or e.g. potentially harmful products, such as power tools without certain currently legally mandated safety features if the buyer is an adult? Are you allowed to sign away certain rights that you are currently not allowed to sign away, e.g. should an adult be allowed to sign themselves over to slavery without the possibility to undo it?

                I have no clue what you were getting at with the drugs, but depending on the circumstance, teenagers that are of the age to enlist can do certainly do these things. I went through two furloughs where I didn’t get paid on deployment and didn’t get compensation. In fact, at one point my checks were garnished because my admin screwed up on per diem when I initially had them check everyday before my transfer to make sure the money was right. They got so pissed at me that their chief told me to not approach their office again with this issue, and they fucked me anyway. I owed around $5000 to the Department of The Treasury because they told me the leftover monet wasn’t an error and that I could go on with my life. That was wrong. And what was I supposed to do? Not do my job? If I would have done that, I would have got an NJP which would have costed me 50% of the 25% that was already garnished. So how is that not slavery or at the very least indentured servitude?

                And let me make it clear, I signed the contract that said, “You’re officially government property.” we pay you as long as you do what you’re supposed to do. I did what I was supposed to do and got fucked anyway. I couldn’t pay my rent or bills, so the utilities reached out to my command and I got fucked even more. I had to go to financial management training and was barred from living out in town. You telling me that’s justified?

                And with power tools, if you seem like you have a brain in your head, the military will throw you power tools. 17, 18, 19. Doesn’t matter

      • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        It is all arbitrary though. There are some weak arguments about mental development but other than the generally accepted rule that human brains stop developing at around 25 years old, there isn’t any hard science between 16, 18, 21, or whatever. Individuals hit developmental milestones at different ages, whether they are physical or mental. Each age-restricted activity requires different types of development. A high schooler may be able to make an informed decision on who or what to vote for, but will be subject to peer pressure to drink alcohol to a dangerous level. You can now sign up to potentially get killed in an instant at 18, but you can’t intentionally give yourself cancer slowly. Kids have better reflexes than seniors, but are also more reckless (imo both ends of the age spectrum should require more frequent driver’s testing and restrictions).

        So since it’s all arbitrary, either we make everything one age, and 18 is a common median of the age-restrictions, or we ditch the restrictions entirely and rely on more extensive and expensive regulations based on individual development.

    • Death_Equity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 day ago

      I would never let 16 year old me vote.

      25 is a solid voting age informed by life experience in the “real world” and a developed brain. Nobody in their late teens to mid 20s can vote with a grasp of reality and understanding of the actual problems that plague society. There is too much optimism and idealistic intentions at those ages. Progress is a slow march against an established defense. Progress, no matter the speed, gains more than attempting brute force attacks against a greater dying populous fervent in their position in opposition.

      With a declining birth rate, slow and steady wins the race; or maybe Idiocracy was a documentary and WALL-E is a hopeful outcome of Surrogates.

      • Michal@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        24 hours ago

        There are a lot of adults who shouldn’t be allowed to vote, but in democracy you let everyone have equal say and don’t make arbitrary rules to exclude certain groups.

  • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Man, it’s a tough one.

    In theory, nobody should be disenfranchised by age at all. But at what age would they be able to vote, as in understand what to do, how to do it, and do so without adult supervision?

    Until they reach that point, it’s essentially their parents or guardians getting an extra vote.

    And then you have to look at other things we limit minors on by virtue of not being able to make informed decisions. So, would we go with driving age, since that’s when we trust them with a ton of death machine? Drinking age? Age of consent for sex (which isn’t always 18)?

    If we change it away from 18 to lower, showing that they have the full rights of any citizen, why don’t they get those other rights with enfranchisement? Why is someone able to vote like someone that has the ability to make an informed choice, but they can’t drink? Hell, that’s already a problem since 18 year olds can be sent to fight and die in the military, but can’t have a beer legally.

    I would be fine with 16 being the age of majority for everything if the individual wanted it. You wanna step into adult life, with all the rights and responsibilities, I don’t have an objection to that at 16. I had too many patients that were married and working before 18 to pretend that it isn’t realistic for someone that age to step into adulthood. I don’t think it’s the best choice, but I wouldn’t fight it if the world decided that way.

    I could definitely made an informed decision for voting at 16. I had access to alcohol, and was able to make the decision to not use it, same with tobacco. I had access to sex, and made the decision to make it safe sex. I was a decent driver, and didn’t have even a fender bender until I was 19, and I wasn’t the one that caused it then. All of the stuff that we limit to “adults”, I know I would have been fully capable of making informed and conscientious decision about any of them.

    But I also knew other teenagers that were absolute morons that couldn’t be trusted not to jerk off in the school bathroom. I knew 16 yos that wrecked cars and put other people’s lives at risk in the process. So I’m okay with the age of majority being 18 too; some of those morons would just flip a coin for their vote, and the mock votes we’d have in school were laughable across the board.

    Not everyone can make an informed and conscientious decision at 30, much less 18.

    So I don’t really think it needs to change, but I agree with you that it sucks that it’s so arbitrary.

    • hellabryanstyle@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      We seem pretty well-aligned. Personally I think 16 is the absolute latest a person ought to have the liberty to do anything that we age restrict. I was talking to someone from Scotland recently where the Age of Majority is 16 and he said that it’s not uncommon there for 16yos to graduate their school system, marry their person, and start a family.

      So to me that is at least some amount of evidence that if we simply perceived 16yos as adults, they would behave more like adults.

    • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      why don’t they get those other rights with enfranchisement?

      ton of death machine?

      because that endangers others too

      Drinking age?

      because alcohol negatively effects development

      Age of consent for sex

      because teenagers have sex anyway; making it illegal would only be harmful

    • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Until they reach that point, it’s essentially their parents or guardians getting an extra vote.

      Honestly I’ve sometimes thought that parents ought to be able to vote for their kids. At least that gives some form of representation to children.

      • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        In that regard, they already have representation by their parents’ votes. All it would achieve is giving parents outsized voting power.

        • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          which isn’t a bad thing either if you want to encourage people to have more kids (which of course is debatable whether that should be a goal, but many people think it should)

        • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          In that regard, they already have representation by their parents’ votes.

          But that vote only counts as much as one person, so it doesn’t give any more representation to the child if you ask me. My whole point is that a parent should have outsized voting power because they represent two persons, not one (okay actually each parent would get 1.5 votes as the child’s vote would be split on each parent but my point is the same).

          • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            No, no citizen whatsoever should be able to cast the votes of other citizens, period.

            If the kid can’t get in the voting booth by themselves, cast their own vote without assistance, then they aren’t voting, someone else is.

            • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              The idea is that the parent represents the child. We don’t trust children to make an informed vote, but we trust parents to make all kinds of choices for their children, including extremely personal choices. The current alternative is to not give children a vote at all. I think letting parents choose the vote for their child is better, and fits pretty well with all the rest that parents currently choose for their child. I also think it’s better than simply letting children of all ages vote, since again, they probably won’t be able to make an informed vote.

              • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                23 hours ago

                So, all I have to do is pump my semen into enough women, get them knocked up, and have thirty votes? Awesome! I’ll be my own bloc!

                • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  23 hours ago

                  I mean… you can already kinda do that right? Raise your children to have similar values to you and they’ll vote like you when they grow up. That happens constantly. There’s just an 18 year latency to it. Obviously you lose the vote once they grow up to vote by themselves. I feel like you’re making a bit of a strawman out of what I’m saying here. We clearly just disagree and that’s okay.