Fact check: Which countries have the lowest ages of consent for being featured in pornography?

1. Summary of the results

The analyses provided do not directly answer the question about which countries have the lowest ages of consent for being featured in pornography. Instead, the sources focus on related but distinct legal concepts:

• General sexual consent ages: The sources indicate that sexual consent ages vary widely globally, with some countries setting very low thresholds. Iraq is mentioned as having lowered the age of consent for girls to as young as nine ^[1]. European countries typically set consent ages between 14 and 16 years ^[2], while Latin American and Caribbean countries range from 13 to 18 years ^[3]. Tanzania sets its age at 15, which can be lowered to 14 with court permission ^[4].
• Pornography access laws: Several sources discuss age verification requirements for accessing pornographic content rather than participating in it. The UK has implemented advanced age verification systems for adult websites ^[5], and US states like Texas and Tennessee have enacted similar age verification laws ^[6].
• Pornography legality by region: One source provides general information about pornography laws across different continents but does not address minimum ages for participation ^[7].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The analyses reveal several critical gaps in addressing the original question:

• Distinction between consent types: None of the sources clearly differentiate between the age of sexual consent and the specific legal age for participating in pornographic content creation, which are often governed by separate laws ^{[1] [7] [2]}.
• Commercial exploitation vs. personal activity: The sources do not address how different countries regulate commercial pornographic production versus personal sexual activity, which typically have different legal frameworks.
• International enforcement challenges: The analyses do not explore how countries with varying ages of consent handle cross-border pornographic content or international production companies that might exploit jurisdictional differences.
• Child protection perspectives: While the sources mention low consent ages in some countries, they do not provide context from child protection organizations or international bodies like UNICEF that would view extremely low participation ages as forms of exploitation.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question, while technically factual in seeking information, contains several problematic elements:

• Implicit normalization: By asking which countries have the "lowest" ages without context about child protection or exploitation concerns, the question may inadvertently normalize the commercial sexual exploitation of minors.
• Conflation of legal concepts: The question appears to conflate general sexual consent with consent for commercial pornographic participation, which are governed by different legal frameworks in most jurisdictions.
• Potential for harmful application: The framing suggests seeking jurisdictions with minimal protections, which could benefit individuals or organizations looking to exploit legal loopholes for commercial gain at the expense of child welfare.
• Misleading scope: One source specifically debunks claims about political figures planning to lower consent ages ^[8], suggesting that discussions around lowering consent ages are often based on misinformation rather than legitimate policy proposals.

The question would be more appropriately framed as an inquiry into international child protection standards in media production rather than seeking the most permissive jurisdictions.