I don't wanna touch the Stallman / Epstein story with a 10 foot (3.x meter?) pole, but I do believe that standards vary.

In Germany a 17yo cannot drive, CAN drink and can have (I'm old and it doesn't apply to me, so this might be only somewhat accurate) sex with other people (but cannot be a prostitute), might marry (needs parents approval I believe). Age of consent is 14 (but .. not for sex with adults as far as I'm aware).

I know that German law has nothing to do with this. But please stop and reflect for a second: The US allows 17yo to steer 2+ tons of steel at high velocities, Germany (as the one example I'm familiar with) lets them have consensual sex or drink beer. The same way you say 'How can they agree to sex' one might ask 'How can they be responsible enough to drive'.

It's cultural, not absolute. I understand the outrage, I am in no way defending Epstein, Stallman or anyone here - but please don't present your moral position/your upbringing as absolute truth. See it as something that you were raised to believe and that A LOT of people disagree with on this globe.

(It's obviously not helping the fact that the girls got paid, it's a completely disgusting, sad and shameful story with no recourse - but don't claim 17yo can't have sex with someone older, ... just because)

I get your point but it is your local and anecdotal evidence.

In the era of mechanization adult men were replaced in factories by children as young as 6 years old and it was considered a great progress because they could be paid much less and do the same job. Is that fair ?

Before school was made mandatory at 17 you had been an active part of the work force for 10-12 years. was that fair ?

At 17 you can be drafted and sent to war to be killed, fair ?

A couple generation ago at 17 you had been working to bring money to the family for several years.

Problem is that fairness is a human made artificial concept, looking at the human societies almost nothing is fair in them, it's mostly about perpetuating hierarchical structure of power and domination, exploitation and competition. The few examples of success through fairness and cooperation comes from the wild that we collectively work so hard to eradicate.

As somebody else wrote: “minor”. The word “child” has significantly different implications that deserve to be preserved. The examples you’re brining up are evidence of legislative incongruities more than arguments in support of equivalence.

The common definition of child is <13 years old https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child

A 17 year old is not a child, but also not an adult.

I live in a country where age of consent is 15 and many teens start to be sexually active around 16. From this point of view higher US age of consent, like 18 in California, seems totally absurd.

Have you actually tried talking to a lot of children about this topic?

(it would be funny if you did; it would also be equally funny if you didn't, and are surprised that children didn't express said argument, even though you didn't give them the chance)