"I think that some BL want to lower the age of consent, but to me this is first hand proof that some children are simply not emotionally ready or mature enough to make appropriate decisions regarding sex."

This is also "first hand proof" that some lower teens (who are only marginally classified as children) are good-and-ready to do something about their sexual needs whether anyone likes it or not. No matter how catholic, calvinistic or islamic a society has become about trying to drive them all into learning abstinence, they have found ways to express themselves, if not with girls (in the case of hetero boys like your YF) then with surrogate boys or even the farm animals.

The question is to what extent such teens should be allowed to criminalize themselves and other people in the course of this explosive and frantic attempt to do something about their intense new drives.

My own opinion is that it's folly to make the sex acts of people 13+ an occasion for state interest except in cases of violence or professional misconduct. I'm all for abstinence but first of all, our current societies are anything but abstinence-promoting, and secondly, it's really a parental matter. I don't mean that parents should try to forcibly institute it, just that they should make a good pitch for its virtues.

Also, that quarter-cup of cream a day has to go somewhere and parents should consider whether they want to give some positive guidance.