
Teenagers having sex is news to no one. Thank goodness the government has seen sense on this
God, remember kissing in corridors? It's been so long since I was a teenager that I had honestly forgotten how much snogging used to happen at school, until it was mentioned in the House of Commons this week. (I have never been a fan of the word snogging, yet as a term it's powerfully evocative of late 1990s-early 2000s adolescence, conjuring a heady mix of Impulse body spray and Lynx Africa, the taste of Juicy Fruit chewing gum, and the sound of braces clashing.)
Teenage love is in the headlines, because of the news that there will be a 'Romeo and Juliet' exemption to the new crime and policing bill obliging professionals in England, including teachers and healthcare workers, to report suspicions of child sexual abuse. The exemption for teenagers in consensual sexual relationships received cross-party support, recognising that 'not all sexual activity involving under-18s is a cause for alarm or state intervention'.
This is all common sense, and similar approaches are already in place in countries such as Australia and France. That teenagers engage in sexual activity should be news to no one – obliging teachers to report every instance as a potential child sexual offence will give them an even higher workload than they face already. Instead, they can use their professional judgment. Safeguards remain in place: if there is any indication of harm or imbalance, the duty to report remains.
It confirms what many of us have long known: that often the most present threat to teenage girls are those older guys who just can't seem to get a girlfriend their own age. You know the kind. The groomers. Guys who are 19, 20, older, who hang around the school gates in their Saxos and Corsas. In my home town, one actually went on the run with – or arguably abducted – a just turned 13-year-old girl. Others would invite underage girls to their shitty flats and ply them with alcohol. Alongside these men you had the even older ones in positions of power – at my own school, the biggest threat to teen girls was our actual headteacher (Neil Foden was eventually convicted of multiple offences).
It would be utterly absurd to put such criminal abuse and exploitation on a par with teenage fumbling. The use of Romeo and Juliet to describe the clause may at first seem rather grandiose, but isn't that just how love, or at least lust, feels at that age? Intense, powerful, tragic even. That feeling of 'If I can't kiss him right this very second against the science block stairs, then I might as well drink poison'. I suspect its resonance is the reason it's on the syllabus for pupils just about coming up to Juliet's age (13). It also provides a framework for discussing these issues in class ('I know you feel like the main character in your own Shakespearean tragedy right now, but maybe put down the deadly nightshade and listen to some Lana Del Rey instead?')
I remember how Amy, who sat next to me in English, could recite most of the play by heart. 'O brawling love! O loving hate!' – I can still hear her voice now. That Romeo is saying these words about Rosaline, before he abruptly switches his affection to Juliet, was lost on us. It was in vain that our English teacher tried to get us to think about how Shakespeare might have been commenting on the fickleness of young love. There's no telling you when you're in the middle of it, is there? Yet there's an argument that we should take teenagers' romantic feelings more seriously, because they can go on to shape us.
Today's teens are lucky, in many ways. They are not experiencing their first love, or lust, against a backdrop of alarming teenage pregnancy rates, as we were. They receive better sex education, at an earlier age, have access to more varied methods of contraception, and are generally more clued up about the biology of reproduction. We certainly weren't making TikToks about the luteal phase – we didn't even know what it meant, let alone how it might affect your dating behaviour.
One thing hasn't changed, though, and that's how vulnerable teenagers are, and how easily their hearts can be broken. We thought we were so grown up when we were fooling around at 15, going on dates to Pizza Hut, dissecting our relationships on MSN and rolling ridiculous 10-skin joints so we could hotbox caravans. We were just kids, like the teens I see walking to school or on the bus now, so impossibly young and naive, but fizzing with hormones that made you want to jump each other.
While jumping each other on a Tuesday morning outside set two maths isn't often going to be a reportable offence, anyone who works with young people knows that their vulnerable hearts need some sort of safeguarding, too. Perhaps, alongside all the work that needs to be done in terms of consent and online misogyny and how to recognise abusive relationships, we all need formal lessons in heartbreak – after all, these years can shape our adult relationships to come and who we are. I wonder about the role they play in later infidelities, too. Most of us are happy to leave those Impulse-scented years behind us, but we all know someone who will always chase that Juicy Fruit high.
Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett is a Guardian columnist and author

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

South Wales Argus
6 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Concern over proposed decriminalisation of killing unborn children
How? By removing 'all legal protection' from the unborn child via 'the Crime and Policing Bill' going through Parliament, by tabling extreme amendments to this Bill that would decriminalise the killing of unborn children (up to birth) by removing the little legal protection they still have. We must write and ask our MPs to vote "no" against these extreme amendments to this Bill - New Clause 1 by Tonia Antoiazzi MP and New Clause 20 by Stella Creasy MP if we value human life, especially the unborn child, who has no voice but ours. Write to your MP at House of Commons, London SW1A OAA. Norman Plaisted, Newport


Sky News
9 hours ago
- Sky News
Is chancellor's spending review the start of a 'national renewal' - or too good to be true?
If you sat through the entire spending review speech delivered by Rachel Reeves in the House of Commons, you might have been lulled into a sense that the UK was awash with a wealth of riches as the chancellor sprinkled billions across the land. There were billions for social housing, nuclear power stations, rail lines and research and development to power the economy. There was money for schools, the police, the NHS, and defence spending, as the chancellor sketched out her roadmap for Britain for years to come, with an acknowledgement that the government - and particularly this chancellor - had endured a difficult first year. "We are renewing Britain. But I know that too many people in too many parts of our country are yet to feel it…the purpose of this spending review is to change that," she said. There was £113bn of borrowing to fund capital investment and an extra £190bn over the course of the parliament for public services, fuelled by those contentious tax rises in the budget last autumn. This was a Labour chancellor turning her back on austerity. "In place of decline, I choose investment. In place of retreat, I choose national renewal," she said. The chancellor deserves credit for the capital investment, which she hopes will unlock jobs and power economic growth. But when something sounds too good to be true, it normally is. For me, former shadow chancellor John McDonnell hit the nail on the head on Wednesday night as he remarked rather wryly to me that "the greater the applause on the day, the greater the disappointment by the weekend". 3:43 Could tax hikes be needed? Because, in talking up the prospect of national renewal, the chancellor glossed over what the "hard choices" mean for all of us. There are questions now swirling about where the cuts might fall in day-to-day budgets for those departments which are unprotected, with local government, the Home Office, the Foreign Office, and the Department for Environment all facing real-terms cuts. My colleague Ed Conway, analysing the government figures, found cuts in the schools budget for the last two years of this parliament - the chancellor's top line figure showed an overall rise of 0.6% over the five-year period of this Labour government. There are questions too over whether council tax bills might be increased in order to top up local government and police budgets. Ms Reeves told me in an interview after her speech that they won't, but she has predicated increases in police funding and local government funding coming locally, rather than from central government, so I will be watching how that will play out. 4:28 Even with the increase in health spending - the NHS is getting a 3% boost in its annual budget - there are questions from health experts whether it will be enough for the government to hit a routine operations target of treating 92% of patients within 18 weeks. My point is that this might not be - to again quote Mr McDonnell - "mathematical austerity", but after over a decade where public dissatisfaction in public services has grown, the squeeze of day-to-day spending could make it hard for the chancellor to persuade working people this is a government delivering the change for them. There is pressure to reverse some of the welfare cuts, and pressure to lift the two-child benefit cap, while the pressure to reverse the winter fuel allowance has already resulted in Reeves this week making a £1.25bn unfunded spending commitment (she will set out how she is paying for it at the next budget). 10:03 Will voters feel the 'renewal'? Reeves told me on Wednesday there was no need for tax rises in the autumn because the spending envelope had already been set, and the money now divvied out. It's a very live question as to whether that can hold if the economy weakens. She did not rule out further tax rises when I asked her last week, while Treasury minister Emma Reynolds told my colleague Ali Fortescue on Wednesday night: "I'm not ruling it in, I'm not ruling it out." The gamble is that, by investing in infrastructure and getting spades in the ground, and tilting limited public money into the NHS, the government can arrive at the next election with enough 'proof points' to persuade voters to stick with them for another five years. On Wednesday, the chancellor laid the foundations she hopes will turn the government's fortunes around. The risk is that voters won't feel the same by the time they are asked to choose.


ITV News
12 hours ago
- ITV News
'South West not mentioned at all': MPs react to Chancellor's Spending Review
Lib Dem and Conservative MPs from the West Country have criticised the Chancellor's Spending Review for barely mentioning the South West beyond Swindon and Bristol. In her first multi-year spending review in the House of Commons, Rachel Reeves announced more cash for the NHS, defence and schools, with cuts to other departments like the Home Office and the Environment. Hartcliffe, in Bristol, was named as a future 'trailblazer neighbourhood' - an area that will be given up to £20 million over the next decade to regenerate - while Swindon was identified as an area ready to build more social and affordable homes, and Filton an area that will benefit from an uplift in defence spending. But beyond a few South West name-checks in Reeves' 45 minute speech, a number of MPs have expressed their frustration. Ben Maguire, North Cornwall's Lib Dem MP, said the duchy was left "completely abandoned", while Taunton and Wellington's Lib Dem, Gideon Amos, said he was "really disappointed" that the region wasn't directly given much more. "We [the South West] have huge concerns - particularly infrastructure," Mr Amos told ITV West Country. He said he'd continue pressing the Chancellor on the likelihood of securing the reopening of Wellington and Cullompton train stations, but suggested the uplift for transport projects was "encouraging", and is hopeful a decision will be made soon. Salisbury's Conservative MP, and former Chief Secretary to the Treasury, was left similarly deflated, with little clarity over the future of the UK Health Security Agency at Porton Down. "Money was invested to move much of Porton Down to Harlow - that cost estimate has now gone up sixfold to £3.2 billion and it is going to be 15 years late," Mr Glen said. "This is an opportunity to save some money - we could invest a modest amount in Porton." Recently, the Health Secretary Wes Streeting said "the worst decision [on Porton Down] is indecision." It's now his job to decide the future of the site, with the funding set out for the health service in the Spending Review. Labour MPs from the region were more positive, celebrating the rollout of free school meals and the government's U-turn on winter fuel payments. South Dorset's Labour MP, Lloyd Hatton, welcomed confirmation from the Chancellor of cash to help rebuild Budmouth School in Weymouth, Exeter's Labour MP Steve Race was pleased with £10 million from the government to help Exeter University with metamaterials research, and Camborne and Redruth's MP Perran Moon insists that he will fight for Cornwall's fair share of funding for new social homes. The West of England Combined Authority also welcomed Reeves' announcements, including the extension of the £3 cap on bus fares and the investment in developing mass transit plans for Bristol. "Leaders across the West have welcomed greater investment through today's Spending Review, with a record three-quarters of a billion pounds of transport funding confirmed for the West," a spokesperson said. "That means better buses, more trains, and mass transit – with trams and much more on the table. The Treasury has also today confirmed plans to improve rail links between Bristol and Cardiff." Business West said investment in the wider South West is needed, beyond the WECA region, for the government to see the economic growth it's depending on. Matt Griffith, Director of Policy, said: "We now have a general idea of the Government's intent, but we await further details on exactly what this means for our region. "We welcome the boost in affordable housing, transport, and infrastructure, which is much needed in our region. The overall message is stark though: the UK faces rising demands for public spending on health, welfare and defence. We need an economy, and strong business base, to bring in the revenue to pay for this. "The recent announcement of £752 million in transport investment for the West of England Mayoral Combined Authority shows that our region has been making progress in being visible to central government. However, the West of England, and wider South West, is still not able to access the full range of funding and powers that other regions have. We need access to these as soon as possible. This is not just in the interests of our region, but the wider UK economy too.' The futures of other transport projects, like the re-opening of the Portishead rail line, are also expected to be revealed in the coming weeks.