Now, to address the latter part of that rebuttal where you say '' It is very easy for the older person to manipulate the younger one''. Again, this contradicts the previous statement you made that states that the relationship CANNOT be considered consensual. Just because something bad can EASILY happen, doesn't mean that it will, obviously. So, if you think that we shouldn't allow these kinds of interactions just because something bad can easily happen, I can use that same logic and say that we shouldn't allow anyone to have children since manipulation can very VERY easily occur between a parent and a child since a parent has MUCH more power or ''authority'' than the child in every single way.

You can also apply this logic to other sexual/romantic relationships and say that someone with a significantly higher IQ can easily manipulate a person with a significantly lower IQ or that someone who is emotionally stoic can easily manipulate someone who is very emotional.

There is also a big difference between something that can easily happen and something that is likely to happen. For example, a parent could EASILY kill their newborn baby, but does that mean that someone is LIKELY to do that? Saying that it's likely to happen, depends on the individual and requires evidence about that person's character and past behavior.

As for the last question, the only ''hard-line'' I draw is at pre-pubescence since those people have no sex drive and no interest in consenting. Like I said, the requirements for consent are desire (a sex drive for sex) and an intellectual understanding of the activity and its possible consequences. Once we go on pre-pubescence we have to rely on inductive evidence and try to get the strongest possible through the observation (preferably done by unbiased psychologists) of an individual's body language, communication lucidity, and even a test about sex after education is done for it. That's a brief summary, but if you really want more explanation, you will have to read the last 5 paragraphs under the '' THE GOVERNMENT'S CLAIMS AND THE ARGUMENTS BASED ON THEM'' section. I'm not writing it all out again and I doubt that you would read it all anyway.

By the way, where is your ''line'' when it comes to age gaps? You said a 14-year-old and 25-year-old is automatically ''predatory'' (is a father engaging in a supposedly ''consensual'' activity with his 14-year-old son also ''predatory''?). I guarantee you that the line you draw will be arbitrary, completely devoid of evidence, and will have absurd logical implications, just like the government nonsense.