age of consent

fishin wrote:

You are presuming and awful lot here...

Don't underestimate puberty. Pre-pubescents might experiment with masturbation and be sexual to somne extent, and obviously they have genetalia. But they're not properly equipped for sex are they. Prepubescent boys don't get erections too often. And also, for biological reasons, I don't think children of those ages tend to get too horny either. Puberty brings sexual maturity.

Quote:

The mental health journals are packed full of this stuff..

Could you show me please? I can't just take your word for it. What evidence/argument is there that, say, early teens are unable to consent to sex.

Quote:

What are you basing your claims on?

It depends which claims you're referring to. If you tell me which claims you want me to back up, I can try my best. I've tried to back myself up with argument so far... if you want some concrete evidence for something then tell me what you want the evidence for and I'll see what I can find. I'm in the process of learning here, so apologies if I make unsubstantiated claims.

Quote:

The only distinction you have between your pre and post-pubescents here is whether or not they've gone through puberty.

See above. Puberty is pretty significant!!

Quote:

So, by this theory, it would be OK to rape someone as long as they enjoyed it?

If they didn't suffer, then yes. Think about it... the reason rape is bad is that it causes intense suffering! If there were no suffering, then what would be bad about it? If a man raped a woman, and the woman both enjoyed it and experienced no physical or emotional pain at all as a result of it (not even in years to come), then no harm would be done. Anyway, I don't think that would ever happen, so I don't think that rape is ever OK in practice.

Quote:

How do you propose to know if they will enjoy it beforehand? What happens if you force yourself upon someone and they don't enjoy it? It'd be a little late to try and back up and pretend it didn't happen wouldn't it?

Good points. Maybe I should stop talking about enjoyment and focus on lack of harm. If you have sex with someone and they don't enjoy it, that doesn't necessarily mean it is abuse. There has to be actual harm (physical or psychological) for it to be abusive. So what I need to know is whether sex with minors causes harm. If you forced yourself on somebody and they really and truly didn't mind at all (and I mean really and truly), and were not harmed at all by it, then I don't think there would be any wrongdoing. Enjoyment isn't necessary; absence of harm is necessary.

Quote:

A film doesn't have the ability to harm me physically in any way, shape or form. Sex, on the other hand, can result in pregnancy or the transmission of STDs.

Well the whole point is that I'm assuming lack of harm. The argument is that consent is not necessary as long as there is no harm done. I'm not conding forced impregnation of minors, or the passing on of STDs to minors. Why can't contraception and medical precautions be used, as with adult sex? I am conding harmless sex, simple as that. If you think that sex with minors is harmful for reasons other than pregnancy or STDs, then I'd love to hear it.

Quote:

Secondly, I, as an adult, am aware of what a film is and what the possible ramifications of watching it (or not) are (the possible mental/emotional "harm"). If I stayed there of my own free will long enough to watch the film then I have given my consent. But in that I presume that I am, capable of walking out at any time of my choosing an dthat there is no other "incentive" keeping me there. Even if there is some other incentive I, as an adult, am capable of weighing the pros/cons of watching the movie or losing the incentive. I am also aware that the decision is mine alone to make.

I think that teenagers are capable of that level of reasoning. And I think (though you might disagree, and I'm willing to hear why) that the burden of proof is on you for saying that they are not. I mean, didn't you make informed decisions as a teenager?

And of course they should be free to withdraw from a sexual encounter at any time... if they were not allowed to do so, then it would be rape. I do not condone rape.

Quote:

And our best mental health professionals tell us that it is [harmful]...

Which ones? I've honestly never heard a mental health professional say that about pubescent/post-pubescent minors. Help me out here.

Quote:

The teen is almost always in an inferior position for decision making here. As minors their rights are limited. They don't know about or have access to remedies tthat an adult would be expected to know of. They are much less likely to have money or a car to escape the situation if they felt the need to, for example. They are also much less likely to be aware of their legal rights. There aren't many adults that would be all to concerned with their parents finding out that they've had sex. An average 14 year old is signifcantly more susceptile to coercion/blackmail than an average adult would be and leaving them open to predation is exactly what the current laws seek to prevent.

Some good points there. I guess what I have in mind is trustworthy adults having sexual relationships with minors. Maybe I'm being too idealistic. But I personally wouldn't coerse or blackmail anybody, of any age, into sex. ANd if I were to have a relationship with someone young, I'd be particularly careful not to push them into anything they might regret. And I really mean that. But of course, not everyone would be the same. Maybe I'm just fishing for acceptance rather than an actual change in the law... I dunno.

sozobe wrote:

What we're trying to get across to you is that 12 and 13 year olds are children. They are not merely smaller than adults or less experienced. Their brains are different.

There's no definite cut-off point between childhood and adulthood. 12 and 13 year olds are only children because we have decided to call them children. And of course their brains are different, but the brains of 40 year olds are different from the brains of 50 year olds, and I doubt you'd complain about sex between people of those ages.

What's important is in what way their brains are actually different. When you emphasise that the brains of minors are different, what differences do you have in mind? If they are different in a way that means that sex with people of that age would cause harm, then I agree with you that sex with them would be inappropriate. But I'm not convinced that their brains are different in that sort of way.

Quote:

This whole thing is of concern, but I find the following downright chilling:

agrote wrote:

I read in a book about sexual ethics that consent is perhaps not necessary if the behaviour does not actually cause harm...

I can see why you'd find that disturbing. But give it a moment's thought. Suppose a stranger came up and suddenly gave you thousands of pounds in cash and said you could keep it. You didn't consent to that in advance, but that doesn't make it abusive. To take the most extreme example... rape is a terrible thing. Why? Because it causes a great deal of harm. Rape is defined as forced sex, but it isn't the fact that it is forced that makes it such a terrible thing. What makes rape terrible is the fact that the act of forcing sex upon somebody causes them a great deal of harm. It's the harm that makes rape bad, not the lack of consent

If rape were as enjoyable and harmless as recieving thousands of pounds, then there would be nothing wrong with it. But that's a HUGE 'if'. The fact is, rape is harmful, and therefore we can't allow it. And if we cannot allow sex with minors, it should be for the reason that it is harmful (I don't think that it is harmful, of course), and not for the reason that there is no consent. Lack of consent may very well be a source of harm, but it's the resulting harm that is important, not the lack of consent itself. This really isn't a very chilling thing to say if you think about it carefully..

a) Physical. Just try doing some research (ask your GP) as to what long term physical harm can come from a female having full internal sex at such an age. You know jack shiite as to whether I'm qualified to advise you on this matter, so it would be of little use if I went into detail. Find out for yourself, as I'm sure it'll be an eye opener for you.

b) Mental maturity. Do you really need me to try to argue the toss with you about whether a twelve or thirteen year old has the mental maturity of an adult? Are you that daft?

You are proposing that you are able to make the determination ahead of time.

Quote:

What determination?

Quote:

...the boggling jumps in logic and the self-delusion I see already leave me little hope that I could accomplish anything.

What boggling jumps in logic have I made? As far as I am aware, my logic is sound, and it's my premises that are questionable. I think that if you agreed with my premises (e.g. that sex with minors is not harmful), you might agree with my conclusion that sex with minors should be accepted. I don't expect you to agree with them, of course, I'm just making the point that I think I'm being entirely logical with the beliefs that I hold.

Your pathetic attempt to rationalize a desire to consummate sexual fantasies which have absolutely no regard for the mental health and well-being of the child in question provides all the evidence needed that you are seeing thirteen year old girls as sexual objects, and not as people. All that this has to do with is your selfish, sexual gratification.

Quote:

If you haven't sought help yet, please do.

If you can convince me that I have a problem, I'll seek help.

You keep talking about post-pubescence, but you also say 12-13 is the age you are interested in. How can you try to claim that this age range is generally post-pubescent??

Puberty is a rather long process, for one thing; for another, how on earth do you think you can judge if some girl you're interested in is really post-pubescent? Do you have some way of knowing whether the hormones being produced are at normal adult levels? Or are you thinking you'll just see if she has breasts yet? 'Cause having breasts does not post-pubescent make, my dear.

And what about the psychological side of puberty? It isn't up to you to decide that only the physiological side of puberty counts, you know. Bottom line, you are not fit to determine whether a 12 or 13 year old is done with puberty.

During my tenure as a child protection worker I heard similar statements fairly often, the speaker usually was wearing handcuffs.

Do a search on the word "Hebephilia". It is exactly your condition.

fishin wrote:

Do a search on the word "Hebephilia". It is exactly your condition.

I'm aware of that term, and I've read that it is not classed as pathological.

"Ephebophilia or Hebephilia has been defined as sexual attraction to adolescents... Ephebophilia is not listed as a paraphilia in the DSM-IV."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephebophilia

I don't think the psychiatrists are on your side here.

As for the cash issue, such services can be arranged through mental health counseling services in the United States; if, as i suspect, you are in the United Kingdom, i suspect that this would be available through the national health scheme.

But you are proposing to merely make an adolescent girl a sexual object into which you will deposit your semen in response to your sexual fantasies. That is not a healthy way to see other people.

Quote:

But you are proposing to merely make an adolescent girl a sexual object into which you will deposit your semen in response to your sexual fantasies. That is not a healthy way to see other people.

I don't know where the hell you're getting this from. I do not see young girls merely as sexual objects; I see them as human beings, and I respect them like nay other human being. I just happen to fancy a lot of them, that's all. You fancy people too. It's normal to lust after females, and it does not entail misogyny or lack of respect for women. It may not be normal to lust after young girls, but why should it entail misogyny? WHat's the logic here?

Presumably you are attracted to adult women (I'm guessing you're male and heterosexual? sorry if I'm wrong). Would it be fair for me to assume that you see adult women as sexual objects into which you will deposit your semen in response to your sexual fantasies? No, it would not. Please don't assume the same thing about me.

The DSM-IV lists the 8 most prevelant paraphillas. That doesn't mean that there aren't others.

Agrote, regarding the physical risks, I may be talking out of my arse here but I believe that the risk of a woman developing cervical cancer later on in life, may be significantly increased if they started having intercourse at an early age.

The logic is that you have not stated or implied that you have an affectionate relationship with a 13 year old girl which your fantasies lead to you wish to consummate sexually. You are simply attempting to argue that you should be allowed to screw a 13 year old, because it turns you on. You aren't talking about an emotional relationship, or mutual physical attraction between two consenting adults (13 year old girls are not adults). You are talking only about gratifying your lust.