>>509278640 (OP)There is no debate and there is no 'rule'. There is only the law. Women are generally biologically breedable at age 14 and that has been the usual age of conception. Morally there is nothing wrong with this - particularly if the goal is to actually build a family, marry and support her. It becomes decadent if used for satisfaction or through exploitation (Ie: drugging, blackmailing, prostitution or using other leverage to coerce).
Below the age of puberty is is always reprehensible and it serves no functional purpose other than perversion. Anyone who abuses a young child should be ostracized and beaten.
In history men have led armies at the age of 12 to 16. To assume that a woman does not 'know what is doing' is a failure of the society and the parents. The concept of 'grooming a wife' is also not negative - particularly if the woman feels positive about it. The alternative is that she is raised to be neurotic and hate herself, rather than to respect herself and feel loved.
In short my philosophy is this:
Teens (past puberty) => Acceptable if married or committed. No abuse of power dynamic, ideally with parental consent.
Pre-Pubescent => Not acceptable in any context. Abusive by default and should not be entertained.
Adult (17-18) => Free game, no pretext of respect required or requirement for firm commitment.
The reason for current consent laws as to explicitly clamp down on child prostitution, but not teenage marriage. Even up until about 2012 men had no issue acknowledging the beauty/attractiveness of a 16 year old. But with feminism, hagification and safety society - we have seen this turn into obsession. Where people conflate a 16 year old woman with an 11 year old. Because it is in the hags interest to remove younger women from the dating market, particularly if they are more inclined to be agreeable.