Posts on Twitter:

The London Construction Programme (LCP) DPS for construction, estates and property professional services is YOUR opportunity to supply to 43 authorities and organisations. Ready to get involved?

Learn in from these . It is a open source, non-invasive, light-weight java ORM (Object relational mapping) to develop objects or instances that will be stored in .

What is all this talk about and #2050? 's new ambitious focuses on the impacts of . This is putting it simply, but the transformation needed within our sector is huge, so read more about it here:

- para la de by & Detecta y explota vulnerabilidades locales, así como la recopilación de información de un sistema, y las aplicaciones que tiene instaladas.

Python with Django Framework Training,New Batches Starting for details reach us at +91 9550287267 or email us at

Learn how your organization can benefit from using the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, also known as NIST-CSF in our next Webinar. Sign up now:

Do you need a for strategic management which includes a and specific categories for ? Visit the SIG Resource Center.

(I) Agradecimientos especiales a Steve de Gravity Forms () por permitirnos presentar PUXL a su equipo y por conectarnos con Rian Rietveld (). 🖤

Posts on Tumblr:


Just completed my quick animation. Feels like ages since i done one. #animator #illustratoroninstagram #illustration #drawing #frames #illustrator #framework #animation #ukillustrator #ukanimator #ukartist #justkeepdrawing #inkingprocess #inkillustration #dancing #tree #yoga #ukillustrator #ukanimator #ukartist #drawing #inkdrawing #landscapeillustration #yogapose (at Stockport)

Made with Instagram


Bon on se dit : c’est pas possible ! 

et bien non il le fait et très bien en plus… alors on y va…


This video will show how you can load data remotely in a select2 element using jQuery AJAX in CodeIgniter project.


Maybe I won’t feel like a bird in a cage
two years from now. Hungry for something
better. Not belly-aching deprivation
threatening to take my soul.
Soothing birdsong sits in my gut,
replays the greatest hits of what could be.
I won’t be here
sitting in my room, on my bed,
staring out the window between vinyl dividers;
watching the tide pour in, the osprey dance
in the pale blue sky.
Metaphoric swing hurts my feet.
Fake gold peels from bar and chains.
Maybe, when the caged-in world I put myself in
dissolves in tomorrows and someday,
I’ll stretch these figurative wings until my back arches,
and fly solo.

Safety in Numbers

There are a lot of people who try to justify their countries’ problems with the “that’s normal for us/them”. Like no, national legal or social practices/norms are not and will never be completely perfect, so just own up to it and change for the better. It’s one thing to correct factually false info, but it’s another to just altogether ignore the issues that someone else might point out.

Related to the framework is the age of consent (AOC). It is a really complicated and sensitive issue, but it’s also important because, well, minors should be protected just as much as people who can’t help having certain conditions. They are hand in hand. We can’t protect children without addessing pedophilia, and we can’t help/treat those who need help without understanding why it is an actual problem and not just a “social” or “legal” norm.

The arguments about it get really tense from “both sides” (the representative with the younger vs. older set age, generally pointing at countries). The first thing I said above would be, in a real example, “It’s common for 16 year old girls marry 25-26 year old men all the time in [so and so] countries”, which still doesn’t make it ideal, secure, or even acceptable. It’s just odd… I see more people who are “afraid of being attacked” and defensively try to justify a country’s lower age than people attacking those people, especially hostily.

The second one would be the issue with Japan’s AOC. Some people keep quoting it as “13” whether to criticize Japan, make all sorts of jokes and mockery, or even try justifying their own issues, but that’s actually just the national required minimum (anything below is automatically statuary rape). There are other things that make it de facto 16/18-20:

  1. Prefectures set their ages/laws higher than this to a minimum of 16—in one prefecture, you can even be arrested for holding hands with a minor (it’s regarded as PDA, handholding is much more connotative in different cultures, etc).
  2. Another national law forbids fornication for anyone under 18. That means the youngest someone could be is a 15 year old female or 16 year old male who is married to someone, with parental permission, outside where ~98% of people even live (like a territory with few people or something).
  3. There’s also the juvenile obscene act, which protects all individuals under 18 from “unethical relationships”. This could be, like the example, the case of a 25 year old and a 16 year old.
  4. Anyone under 20 is considered a juvenile. That is, there can still be strong disagreement from the parents or families that causes legal action.

These charts best explain the issue:

Obviously for Japan specifically here, the issue is not age of consent in itself but between older/younger male/female (it’s wrong not only because ideologically “it’s sexist” but it actively harms underage males who are taken advantage of). I guess including same-sex cases, they would still be tried/punished like this:


Tangent aside, I’ve been trying to examine how consent, with the intrinsic consequences of such “relationships”, is still more complex/secondary to a person than what could be grounds for low ages in the AOC. “Secondary” here also goes along with the known biological secondary sex characteristics. The maturity doesn’t just happen overnight; it’s very gradual, and it coincides with the mental/emotional maturity related to it.

Just because, for instance, the age of reason starts somewhere between 7/8 and 12 (I round to 8 being the lowest, 12 being the highest, with the exception of the developmentally disabled) doesn’t mean one’s reasoning capacities are developed. In fact, as these “Well in my country” people keep pointing out for just about anything (alcohol, child labor, etc), the brain fully develops at 25. I mean, no one is focused on finding the One Number™️ to begin with, just a reasonable range that ensures the well-being of youth before any self-serving aims.

Then a smug responder, refusing to listen to more subtle/considerate ideas, might say this resolves the debate because “Well then you’d have to set it to 25”. No, that doesn’t address it, at all. There is still a “region”, as murky or contentious as it may be, where a person gains the capacity to consent or refuse to consent, know the weight of, and handle it. In fact, the difficulty and confusion should make us even more careful with this, not less. Anyway, consent means free will: there is no coercion, manipulation, necessity, intimidation, etc.

Here are some broader “types” of each:

  • If you have to deceive and/or manipulate the person to get an agreement (lying about some factor, but also the guilt-tripping, emotional conditioning, etc, connected to the next point), that’s not consent. That is inability to reason or decide.
  • If refusal deprives someone of [their ability or choice to get] necessities (food/shelter/water but also mental/emotional well-being, stability, etc.), that is not consent (that is actually closer to other topics). That is dependency or vulnerability.
  • If the person is frightened, overwhelmed, or otherwise threatened/halted in refusal of that action to a more powerful/able person (emotionally, physically, in a position of trust, etc), that is not consent. That is control transfer or intimidation.
  • If the person is overpowered to not be able to refuse physically (coercion directly in person, indirectly by drugs, excessive intoxication, etc), that is not consent. That is outright force.

Each point varies in indirectness to directness (and maybe obvious/provable extremeness), but all of them are valid. They encompass practically all cases where there is both (1) the “imbalance” in age/control/“power” and (2) significantly less capacity, inherently, to appreciate and handle the situation. This would always apply to “relationships” that involve minors and major age differences. A usually less extreme, financial parallel to this would be predatory lending.

- Reason 1 probably best relates to cases where the participant cannot be expected to even have a meaningful, sound, understanding of sex[ual relationships], the ramifications, etc., especially not just in a nominal way. This is probably the most common argument.

- Reason 2 is fairly broad and gets closer to other controversial topics, such as employment and prostitution. In many cases this could also be the misplacing/taking advantage of psychological needs into sexual contexts.

The vast majority of minors who are involved in sexual relations with far older adults, or such minors, either have other problems or later develop them. They are likely to be put in abusive or manipulative situations as adults, and often they have issues with alcoholism, drug misuse, and so on. I would guess that this happens because the minor does not learn—or loses—the ability to set proper boundaries for themselves, and sadly this frequently continues and expands out to other contexts/people.

I have observed this from people I know personally. Even if this is purely mistaking correlation with causation, which I still doubt, the harm it is so likely to the minor alone is a valid reason why it is not acceptable.

- Reason 3 is another common reason people usually have, better known as a “power imbalance” where one person is still far more vulnerable inherently (which is precisely why it has an equally severe penalty), especially in ability to process the situation, being able to meaningfully accept/reject, etc.

- I think that Reason 4 is self-explanatory.

The most reasonable understanding would be that in order to consent, the participant has to be physically and mentally/emotionally independent enough (relative to the older party), and there cannot be any pressure or necessity that prompts the action. Well, that sounds like… adults require adult consent, and minors with other minors is not the same as minors with (much older) adults. What a shocker.

Now, there are some things we do where “consent” is not as applicable (many people are forced to work to get essentials to live, for just one example), but those are different subjects (which have their own solutions), and that doesn’t end the question of consent here. You might still excuse such relations between a minor and adult as “OK” in your eyes (not necessarily from the minor’s perspective), but you cannot call it consensual.

Also, I’ve been thinking about the timeline for age of reason development (AORD). This is a lot more obscure because the ability to reason/decide is different to some extent for each person. But we’re looking at the larger picture, and the following is not guaranteed to be right.

This will not be exact or clear cut, and the goal isn’t being able to account for every difference between individuals with one magic number, but considering for the broadest majority who fit under that age, because expected capacities are there. I.e., there may be some “mature” 13 year olds out there, but this exception could not be implemented or practiced broadly, or maybe at all. This would be like one student scoring perfect on a test while everyone is below passing grade. The fault falls back on the teacher or the curriculum.

The average between the min. and max. “age of reason” would be 10. By minimum, I mean 7/8, which is the known historical standard, and by maximum I mean 12, the age at which most individuals can be expected to reason. I rounded up to 8 for the minimum because we could picture that it is finally “there” by around 8. Then age at which the brain is fully developed is said to be 25, so it’s not only “there” but it is the most adept, skillful, or fully grown. I was thinking if we could organize the AORD into the classic “early”, “mid”, and “late”, depending on where it starts/ends.

If the minimum (10) is excluded:

  • Early = 11-15
  • Mid = 16-20
  • Late = 21-25

If the maximum (25) is excluded:

  • Early = 10-14
  • Mid = 15-19
  • Late = 20-24

Would it just be better to assume the completion of development happens at some time in age 25 or certainly completed at 26? This seems to be the case, because the variation between individuals still goes from some time right before to almost after being 25 to 26.

I am guessing this would mean for “Early”, you would expect reasoning and abstract capacities to be there, but they’re still rudimentary and fairly unaccountable/dependent for many contexts (again with loan lending). “Mid” would be closer to adeptness, but it can still be rash or somewhat sensitive. For “Late”, we could say we reach a point of both final appreciation + capacity. Of course, by all of this I don’t mean it in an intellectual sense, but in the sense of general wisdom.

Clearly, no one is going to agree on a set age, but it would be much better for everyone if people could agree on an “area”. Maybe this can demystify the visceral responses that many, if not most people have and trust.