Well no, the highlighted part was not Cyber Sex. Cyber sex is sending naked pictures or otherwise engaging in sex acts via an internet chat device or webcam chat. It's all the rage with today's teens.
What you just highlighted is basically the Chris Hanson sting operation, to catch a predator. Where an adult uses a chat room to groom and ultimately to try to initiate a sex act with a minor. It's more intent to harm a minor than a charge about actually harming a minor. But I don't know much about Austrian law, so don't quote me on that. But bear in mind that the people in that sting operation probably did only receive 2 years prison time. And America is far more harsh, at least legally speaking, with the whole age of consent thing (albeit inconsistently state to state.)
I'd argue age of consent is largely cultural. But age of consent, especially it it's below 18, is not clear cut. Most of the time it will have many many distinct nuances written into the law. In Australia ours is 16, with the caveat that an older partner has to be within a 7 year age gap, cannot be a trusted legal guardian of any kind (teacher, foster parent etc) with certain leeway given to partners of comparable age. (One would agree that a 15 year old having non coerced sex with their 16 year old girlfriend/boyfriend should not end in statutory rape charges.) I sincerely doubt an American who lives in a State with the age of consent being 21 would view that as anything other than disgusting. But to someone who grew up in Australia, it's seen as totally normal.
One must also remember that kids are having sex younger and younger these days anyway. Especially cyber sex. The law should be mindful of this, lest a teenager be charged with distribution of child pornography for sending naked photos of themselves to their boy/girlfriend.
You seem to be aghast that "developed nations" could possibly have an age of consent law as low as it is. I see it as these developed nations being realistic about teenage sex and pragmatic about their approach to it, rather than having kids on the sex offender registry for what is ultimately harmless teenage shenanigans.
I'm not talking about two 14-year-olds having sex with each other; I'm talking about things like a 30-year-old having sex with a 15-year-old. The age difference is crucial when talking about this issue, in my opinion, because there's no way two teenagers of the same age having sex with each other is the same as a 30-year-old having sex with someone half his or her age.
I'd also like to throw this theory into the mix.
Cultural reaction to a minor having sex can influence how severe the trauma is. If society tells a minor who had sex at a relatively young age that they should be utterly gutted from a sexual experience that young, this can exacerbate or even create trauma within the minor and colour how they see and react to the experience.
This is even true among sexual abuse victims. When a child does not react strongly to the abuse, or even at all (and this does actually happen) society implicitly or even explicitly tells them that they are merely masking the "real" affect it has had and therefore they feel pressured to either feel inadequate and broken or try to heighten the trauma they experience.
Well, on the flip side, we have societies where child marriage is not uncommon, yet it is no less destructive than anywhere else:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-childbride-idUSBRE98910N20130910
I think there are certain problems with the marriage or sexual relationship of, say, a 13-year-old to or with a person who is something like 28 or 30 that have little or nothing to do with society's reactions to the sexual relationship between the two. The mental and physical development of a child aren't going to change based on any given society's reaction to such a relationship, are they?
That's obviously not to say a predator should have free reign to abuse children. Ew. But one should be mindful that the black and white approach to sexual abuse of minors can actually detrimentally affect actual children who were sexually abused themselves.
(Please note I am not at all encouraging sex with minors or even defending it. Far from it. This is merely for discussion sake.)
I'm not sure I agree with the point you are raising here. This feels to me like arguing that since some societies don't recognize marital rape as a form of rape, raising awareness about it there could detrimentally affect victims of marital rape in those societies. I think it's important to raise awareness about abuse regardless of whether or not the society the victim lives in tolerates such abuse. That's not what I'm asking about in this thread; what I'm asking about is whether setting the age of consent as low as 14 or 15 is legally sanctioning child rape to begin with.