age of consent

honey_rose_cr wrote:

A 17 year old, over a year over the age of consent and I still wasn't brave enough to stand up for myself or recognise my own feelings.

I'm sorry to hear that. But how do you know it has anything to do with being young? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you didn't understand that delaying sex until you're ready wouldn't make your boyfriend like you any less (or that if it did, he wouldn't be worth knowing). But you seem to understand it now, after only a few more months. It seems to me like you were probably old enough to make the right choice all along, you just didn't have the right information.

You're pretty much an adult now, and I'm sure that older adults make the same mistake that you did... I don't think it has anything to do with age, just knowledge. Knowledge of information that younger teens might be perfectly capable of understanding.

Quote:

There's also the side that says naturally humans become 'ready' for sex around 12/13, or so their body says, but their mind is certainly not prepared for it in almost all cases.

That might just be lack of decent sex/relationship education; their minds might not be prepared, but they could well be preparable. Many people of that age are old enough to want sexual relationships*, and in my view they should not be denied the right to have them if they want to, so I think it would be worthwhile to prepare them to do it safely and only when they know they are ready.

*I mean 'sexual relationships' in a very broad sense; I don't just mean relationships involving penetrative sex.

0 Replies

Quote:

I'm sorry to hear that. But how do you know it has anything to do with being young? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you didn't understand that delaying sex until you're ready wouldn't make your boyfriend like you any less (or that if it did, he wouldn't be worth knowing). But you seem to understand it now, after only a few more months. It seems to me like you were probably old enough to make the right choice all along, you just didn't have the right information.

I wasn't MATURE enough to make the decision. I've had plenty of sex education etc, I understand the ins and outs of actually having sex, but from an emotional point of view I WASN'T PREPARED. At age 17.

I did understand it then, I just wasn't strong enough to stand up for myself. I've only matured that much over the past few months from actually being in the relationship, having to deal with the ups and downs of it, and starting a new job. I was TERRIFIED of starting a new job, it's a REALLY big thing that I've stuck with it, and because of that I've learnt how to speak up for myself.

You make it sound like I couldn't have matured that much in a few months, many different situations that I've been put in since then have made me much more ready to think "what do I want?"

An awfully large number of 13 year olds and ages there abouts, wouldn't have had the chance to mature that much in their life. They wouldn't have the bravery and courage to defend themselves and think "Am I doing this for me?" At least at age 17, I had thought about the consequences, thought about how it would effect me mentally, if I wanted to spend the rest of my life with the person I was having sex with etc.

At age 13, who's going to have the courage to say "Hey, can you get tested for STDs?" or, especially if they're having sex off the spur of the moment or with someone older than them, will they be brave enough to stand up to them and think "I want to use contraception, even if he/she doesn't."

It's very much a courage thing, and courage to stand up for yourself, especially in a sexually related situation, comes only with age. At 13 I was having 'dry sex' with my male friends. I was surrounded by boys. If any one of them had taken my flirtacious advancements seriously, I could've been in BIG trouble; I wouldn't have spoken up for myself, I was curious and a lot of people would let their curiosity over-rule common sense and regret it later on.

0 Replies

honey_rose_cr wrote:

You make it sound like I couldn't have matured that much in a few months, many different situations that I've been put in since then have made me much more ready to think "what do I want?"

Okay, I believe you.

Quote:

An awfully large number of 13 year olds and ages there abouts, wouldn't have had the chance to mature that much in their life. They wouldn't have the bravery and courage to defend themselves and think "Am I doing this for me?"

Well, I don't know how many 13 year olds would be like that. Maybe a large number, maybe a small number. But there are people in their 20s or 30s wouldn't have that bravery and courage either. How much of your sex education was devoted to being taught to stand up for yourself, and being taught that you don't have to have sex with people to make them like you? Mabye not much? Maybe that's where the problem lies?

It sounds like getting a job helped you mature a bit, and gain a bit more confidence. But is that the only way of getting the confidence you need to stand up for yourself?

Quote:

At age 13, who's going to have the courage to say "Hey, can you get tested for STDs?" or, especially if they're having sex off the spur of the moment or with someone older than them, will they be brave enough to stand up to them and think "I want to use contraception, even if he/she doesn't."

Somebody with good sex education will be brave enough to do that, I think. At that age I was the complete opposite of brave - I was very puny, and passive, and I got bullied. Yet I had a friend who spent all his free-time smoking with other friends in the park, and I spent a lot of tiem with them and was able to refuse every cigarette that was offered to me, because of what my parents and teachers had told me about the dangers. And on one occasion I went with a group of them to sit on a secluded bench at night while they smoked a joint. Cannabis was something I wanted to try, but I had read that it was unwise to take it with a group of people who you do not know or trust very well, so I didn't. All night I sat with them, and repeatedly resisted the strong peer pressure to smoke it with them, simply because of a sentence I'd read in a book called 'Drugs Info File' that said something about how cannabis exaggurates your emotions, and can be unpleasant if you are with people you don't trust and you feel nervous.

So I think that with the right knowledge, young teenagers can have the courage to resist peer pressure and stand-up for what's best for themselves. I think that if a 13 year old were taught the right things, or read the right things, she would be able to say, "I'd like to have sex with you but only if you wear a condom, because I don't want to get pregnant". Or, "I like you, but I'm not ready to have sex yet and I'd like to wait." Etc.

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

I found a study about age of onset of paedophilia, hebephilia and ordinary sexuality. I've forgotten where it was, but I'll try and find it again. It concluded that the age of onset is the same for hebephilia and normal sexuality, and different for paedophilia, suggesting that the etiology (origin) of hebephilia has more in common with normal sexuality than with paedophilia.

I haven't found that study again yet. But I found another one which supports the same idea: http://www.springerlink.com/content/j166hm477172634j/

This study found that the rate of left-handedness was much higher amongst paedophiles (those attracted primarily to prepubescent children, and not adolescents) than it was amongst those attracted primarily or explusively to adults (17+, I think). This suggests a possible neurological difference in paedophiles, since there is a neurological basis for handedness, and therefore a neurological difference between left- and right-handed people.

But what's relevent to this thread is that the study only found an increased rate of left-handedness amongst paedophiles, and not amongst hebephiles (those who were attracted to adolescents who had begun or completed puberty). This again suggests that hebephilia, or the etiology of hebephilia, has more in common with normal adult sexuality than it does with paedophilia.

One implication of this is that it is not appropriate for the term 'paedophilia' to cover hebephilia as well, as it so often does. Paedophilia and hebephilia appear to be two very different things. They are different because for a paedophile, children who have reached puberty are of little or no sexual interest to them. And for hebephiles, children who have not reached puberty are of little or no sexual interest to them. And furthermore, these two studies might suggest that the biological bases for paedophilia and hebephilia are completely different.

This at least supports my assumption that the debate over whether hebephilia should be accepted ought to be kept completely seperate from the debate over paedophilia. Many minor-attracted-adults support both causes, but I'm personally not sure about paedophilia. I certainly don't think that penetrative sex with prepubescent children is safe, simply in terms of anatomy. And I am not sure what the effects of other forms of sexual contact may be, or whether paedophilia should be considered a sort of sexual orientation, or a neurological/mental difference that actually causes problems either for children or for the paedophiles themselves (i.e. a mental illness).

So I think that the people who called me "sick" should try to keep their views on paedophilia seperate from their views about people like me. If hebephilia really is a sort of sickness, it seems to me that it is a different sickness to paedophilia, and the claim that it is a sickness requires a seperate defence from the argument that paedophilia is a sickness.

0 Replies

Hello Agrote; now that I've had a break and regained my patience-- which had begun to be severely strained-- I wanted to post just one other thing...Basically my input on this topic is exhausted; this seems to just be going around and around in circles and I just don't think there's much else to say to you about it, but I do keep coming back to one idea I want to put to you.

Maybe this is completely off-base, but you are only 20, after all, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I wonder if you're maybe a not-so-experienced 20-year-old. Have you had very many relationships? Isn't there a chance that you're still really kind of--well, not to be condescending-- but a bit immature yourself? 20 is very young anyway, and especially if you haven't had a lot of relationships, I think part of this might be that your "emotional age" is not really in sync with your chronological age.

When I put aside my discomfort with your comments regarding whether consent is necessary (which, to my mind, is the main thing you've said which makes this so worrisome, but I'm going to tell myself that that was just an academic point for you), and just think about this age thing, what I come up with is that at age twenty I was attracted to a wide range of ages. I wouldn't have gone so far as to say 12-year-olds, but there were 14 and 15-year-olds who I found attractive, as long as they looked like young men and not boys. It just never occurred to me to call it a "condition," since I also found guys my age and older attractive too. You mention that you can be attracted to girls your own age as well, correct? So why are you so certain that the range of ages that you find appealing won't age as you yourself age and mature?

0 Replies

cyphercat wrote:

Maybe this is completely off-base, but you are only 20, after all, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I wonder if you're maybe a not-so-experienced 20-year-old. Have you had very many relationships? Isn't there a chance that you're still really kind of--well, not to be condescending-- but a bit immature yourself? 20 is very young anyway, and especially if you haven't had a lot of relationships, I think part of this might be that your "emotional age" is not really in sync with your chronological age.

You're right that I'm inexperienced, and I'm sure that at 20 I'm bound to be immature to some extent, compared to someone older. My frontal lobe isn't fully developed either. And it's possible that those are the reasons for my sexuality, but I think that's just speculation. Many 20-year-old virgins want adult women with large breasts, so I'm not sure that lack of experience necessarily breeds people like me. And I wouldn't say I'm particularly immature for my age... I definitely consider myself an adult now.

Anyway, so what you suggest is possible, but I personally doubt it. My attraction to young girls doesn't feel like something circumstantial. I see them, their size and shape, etc., and it just fits... just as an average man might respond sexuality to cues such as large breasts, child-bearing hips and so on, I respond that way to smaller breasts and bums and other cues of youngness. I think that my sexuality is phenomenologically equivalent to what a gay man must feel looking at other men.

And my particular sexuality began at puberty and has remained constant, which suggests that it's as biologically innate as normal sexuality. At 12-14 I was attracted to schoolmates, and then I can remember as young as 15 finding myself attracted to girls who were unusually young (say 12 or 13). I had a friend who I noticed had the same preference for girls whose breasts had not fully developed, and we both knew that we had this preference but were reluctant to say it out loud because we knew how unusual and taboo it was, even at 15.

So I still think (although I don't know for sure) that my sexuality is basically something innate and which has been with me since the onset of puberty, just like like other sexual preferences normally are (e.g. homosexuals often report knowing at age 11 that they were gay). I think it's mostly nature rather than nurture.

Quote:

When I put aside my discomfort with your comments regarding whether consent is necessary (which, to my mind, is the main thing you've said which makes this so worrisome, but I'm going to tell myself that that was just an academic point for you)...

That definitely was an academic point. I mean, I found the argument in an academic book (about sexual ethics). And it wasn't pro-paedophilia/hebephilia propoganda; the book actually argued that paedophilia is wrong because there is an imbalance of power. But before making that conclusion, the author argued that issues of consent collapse into issues of whether harm is caused, or whether good can come out of the action. Children often do not want to take baths, but forcing them to do so is not abusive because it does not harm them and it is actually good for them. Consent is only important if the behaviour being consented to is harmful or non-beneficial. Do you see what I mean? So what matters in the present debate is whether sex with adolescents is actually harmful. If it is harmful, then consent is very important, and if it is not harmful, consent is only as important as it is for other harmless things like hugs or handshakes.

I can see why the argument sent a shiver up your spine, but I think my limited ability to explain myself is the reason for that. The argument itself isn't really all that chilling if you think about it... it might be a bad argument, and you're entitled to disagree with it, but it's just a philosopher's attempt to pick apart the ethical issues surrounding underage sex and determine exactly what is wrong about it, if anything. The philosopher did not have any sinister thoughts or intentions in making that argument; it was just a piece of philosophy, and an attempt to get at the truth. Think of it as like a mathematical equation.

Quote:

You mention that you can be attracted to girls your own age as well, correct? So why are you so certain that the range of ages that you find appealing won't age as you yourself age and mature?

I am attracted to girls my own age, but not very often. I think that's one of the main reasons for my lack of sexual experience; I only come across a limited number of 20-ish girls who I am attracted to, so I only have a limited number of oppurtunities to find a girlfriend. I know this sounds weird and maybe a bit creepy, but I see most 'girls' my age as being a bit too womanly... the 20-year-old girls I tend to like are the ones that look a bit more girlish, and less like adults.

I'm certain that as I grow older, I will continue to be attracted to some women my age, if mainly on an emotional rather than physical level. But since my strong sexual (and emotional) attraction to adolescents has remained constant for about 8 years, I'd be surprised if it that starts to change. I'm past puberty now so I can't see why I'd undergo any such significant psychosexual 'development'. I was googling hebephilia the other day and came across a 30-year-old man who was making similar arguments and claims to the one's I've made here (this is his website: http://hebephilia.blogspot.com/). I suspect that this is something I won't grow out of.

0 Replies

This well-sourced video supports my claim that ephebophilia is a sexual orientation, and an unalterable characteristic of certain people (just like normal heterosexuality or homosexuality):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBw9knKkvtk

(I didn't make the video, by the way.)

The video is about paedophilia, but the author seems to consider ephebophilia to be a type of paedophilia, and I think that its claims are relevant to my own condition.

Pay attention to the claims about paedophiles (and ephebophiles) being perfectly ordinary people in every respect apart from their sexual orientation. They are no more aggressive, unintelligent or immature than ordinary adults.

It seems to me that attraction to minors is not pathological or harmful in-itself. Of course, paedophilia often drives people to commit acts which cause great harm to children. But it is those acts which are harmful and pathological, not the paedophilia or ephebophilia itself. The same goes for ordinary sexuality. Raping adults is harmful and pathological behaviour, and one of the motivationsto rape adults is ordinary hetero- or homosexuality. But it is the rape which is the problem, not the underlying sexuality.

Is anyone with me this far? If you read this thread, you'll see that I go a step further and claim that adolescents are physically and emotionally capable (with proper sex/relationship education) to have adult-like romantic and sexual relationships with other adolescents or with adults, and that they should be allowed to make their own choices about whether they enter into such relationships.

I don't expect many people to agree with that, but does anybody at least agree that ephebophilia (and paedophilia, though that is not the subject of this thread) is an unalterable sexual orientation? It may be an orientation which should never be acted upon (because of the harm that would cause), but do you at least agree that it is a sexual orientation, like homosexuality or heterosexuality, and not a pathological condition that carries with it other characteristics such as lack of empathy, or fear of adulthood, or whatever?

0 Replies

To the TA:

Unless you move to Japan or Spain, acting out on your desire to hook up with a 13 y/o could prove to be disasterous. If you're hell bent on legally getting some, there are a slew of countries throughout Europe which have AoC laws of 14y/o (Austria, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal, Serbia).

In any case, recommendations that you get counseling are worth your time to consider. The aim shouldn't be to rid you of your fixation on early pubescent girls (highly unlikely), but to break down the wall of self-justification that results in your claim that 13 y/olds are emotionally capable of having "adult-like" romantic/sexual relationships. No offense, but you are this ->| |<- close to being a pedophile.

0 Replies

Kratos wrote:

In any case, recommendations that you get counseling are worth your time to consider. The aim shouldn't be to rid you of your fixation on early pubescent girls (highly unlikely), but to break down the wall of self-justification that results in your claim that 13 y/olds are emotionally capable of having "adult-like" romantic/sexual relationships.

What wall of self-justification? Do you mean my arguments? What's wrong with my arguments? You haven't told me. If my arguments are invalid, or based on false information, then you'll have to explain how. If you can't refute my arguments, then you have no reason to deny their conclusions. Even if I've made these arguments in an attempt to justify my own sexuality, that doesn't necessarily mean that my sexuality is not justified by them. My claims might still be validly inferred from true premises... I could be right for the 'wrong' reasons.

I suggest that you focus on the issue of whether or not 13 y/olds are ready for sex, rather than the issue of why I believe that they are. If you want to start a separate thread called 'agrote's motivations', then go ahead, but stay on topic here please.

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

Kratos wrote:
In any case, recommendations that you get counseling are worth your time to consider. The aim shouldn't be to rid you of your fixation on early pubescent girls (highly unlikely), but to break down the wall of self-justification that results in your claim that 13 y/olds are emotionally capable of having "adult-like" romantic/sexual relationships.

What wall of self-justification? Do you mean my arguments? What's wrong with my arguments? You haven't told me. If my arguments are invalid, or based on false information, then you'll have to explain how. If you can't refute my arguments, then you have no reason to deny their conclusions. Even if I've made these arguments in an attempt to justify my own sexuality, that doesn't necessarily mean that my sexuality is not justified by them. My claims might still be validly inferred from true premises... I could be right for the 'wrong' reasons.

I suggest that you focus on the issue of whether or not 13 y/olds are ready for sex, rather than the issue of why I believe that they are. If you want to start a separate thread called 'agrote's motivations', then go ahead, but stay on topic here please.

Your reasoning is wrong because the majority of mental health professionals would disagree with your assessment, and not simply due to social stigma concerns. Research has shown that mental/neural pathways undergo maturation well into one's 20s. As to the breakdown of the different types of maturation, particularly regarding sex, I won't pretend to know WTF I'm talking about because I'm not a damn shrink. All I can really say for certainty is that psychology in mant aspects is a very inexact science and that your claim is little more than hopeful conjecture.

It appears that you're so hung up on sex at the moment that this affects your outlook. Instead of accepting that the pieces to the puzzle don't fit, you're deforming them to make them fit.

0 Replies

The problem with you boils down to perception vs. reality.

You perceive yourself posting an "intelligent" debate on whether or not it's ok to f**k kids.

The reality is, you want to f**k kids, and if you're not intelligent enough to realize why that is wrong, the world would be better off without you ruining the gene pool.

0 Replies

Slappy Doo Hoo wrote:

The reality is, you want to f**k kids, and if you're not intelligent enough to realize why that is wrong, the world would be better off without you ruining the gene pool.

If you're not articulate enough to explain to me how sex with adolescents is wrong, then you're wasting your time. You won't change my mind (or make me feel guilty, or whatever it is you want to do) just by making an assertion without backing it up.

And your implication that I should die because of my 'bad genes' is simply fascistic. Disabled people are "ruining the gene pool" too... should they be killed? Who knows, maybe I really am 'sick', but at least I'm not calling for anybody to be killed. I'm not even calling for anybody to be harmed in any way... if underage sex really is harmful, then I'm against it. I'm defending what I believe to be harmless sex. I may be wrong to believe that, but it's not morally wrong to hold a false belief.

It is, arguably, wrong to tell somebody that you hope he dies. Thanks for that, you're nice.

0 Replies

Kratos wrote:

Your reasoning is wrong because the majority of mental health professionals would disagree with your assessment, and not simply due to social stigma concerns.

First of all, I don't know that that is true, and I can't take your word for it. Can you give me some evidence that there is this concensus amongst mental health professionals?

Secondly, a consensus (even among experts) is not a wholly accurate guide to what is true. There was once a consensus that homosexuality was pathological, but that turned out not to be the case. Quite often (or most of the time), mental health professionals will agree on something because the evidence is so compelling. But you need to remain skeptical, because they aren't always right.

Anyway, the first point is more important. Back up your assertion with evidence, please.

Quote:

Research has shown that mental/neural pathways undergo maturation well into one's 20s.

Yet we allow those in their late teens or early twenties to have sex. Why?

Quote:

All I can really say for certainty is that psychology in mant aspects is a very inexact science and that your claim is little more than hopeful conjecture.

Which claim is hopeful conjecture? Remember that this point invalidates your claims to a certain extent... even if psychologists do think that underage sex is harmful, their science is inexact in many respects and so they can never be too sure. Your claims also lose their credibility in light of this:

Quote:

I won't pretend to know WTF I'm talking about because I'm not a damn shrink.

The problem is that you do pretend to know that "my reasoning is wrong". If you don't know what you're talking about, then how can you be sure that it's harmful for adolescents to have sex?

Quote:

It appears that you're so hung up on sex at the moment that this affects your outlook. Instead of accepting that the pieces to the puzzle don't fit, you're deforming them to make them fit.

I doubt I'm hung up on sex any more than you are. And while it is possible that my sexuality has biased my views on this subject, I could easily say the same thing about you. You are attracted to adults, so maybe that is blinding you to the truth about adolescent sexuality.

0 Replies

agrote:

You say 13/14 y.o. is OK in certain scenarios. How about 12? 11? 8? 3? Do you have an minimum age limit? If so, what is it? If not - what is your criteria? Do you feel that the parents should know? If not - why not? If yes, tell us how that conversation might go?

0 Replies

baddog1 wrote:

You say 13/14 y.o. is OK in certain scenarios. How about 12? 11? 8? 3? Do you have an minimum age limit? If so, what is it? If not - what is your criteria? Do you feel that the parents should know? If not - why not? If yes, tell us how that conversation might go?

Those are good questions. I think that it would be kinder to let the parents know, for their own reassurance. But I don't think the son/daughter should necessarily need to get his/her parents' permission. If, say, a 13 year old girl and an adult are in love, and the adult is not being coersive or threatening or anything like that, then I don't think the parents should have the right to override the girl's decision to be in the relationship. But it would be rude not to meet the parents. How might the conversation go? Well in this day and age, very badly I suppose, depending on the attitudes of the parents. Maybe some liberally-minded parents could come to accept such a relationship. If, over the years, public opinion changes in the way that it has changed regarding homosexuality, then in the future parents might find it easier to accept such relationships.

I do think there should be an 'age of consent' (although I wouldn't want to use that term) at least for penetrative sex. It seems pretty obvious that intercourse with a toddler would cause physical damage. There must be a point at which it becomes no longer physically harmful, and I think that point comes before the end of puberty. But I'm not sure, I'm not an expert. As for non-penetrative sexual contact, I don't think there's much of a physical risk there (no more than there is amongst adults), so on a purely physical level, a minimum age limit is less important.

As for emotional/mental factors, I'm not sure what part these play. I believe that some of the emotional harm that children can experience following consentual sexual relationships is caused by feelings of guilt or isolation due to the taboo surrounding paedophilia and hebephilia. We're told repeatedly that sex with children or adolescents is the worst thing that can happen. While that may be true, the fact that it is drilled into us so strongly is bound to make those adolescents who willingly have sex with adults feel guilty about what they've done. They might feel that they have done something dirty or disgusting, based purely on the dominating attitude that sex with adults is 'sick'. I think that our strong attitude towards sex between adults and minors actually makes the sex more harmful than it would be otherwise.

When you take that out of the equation, and imagine a world where sex with minors is accepted, what mental harm remains, and at what age does it go away? I don't know. I'm sure that certain sexual acts must be frightening to young children, and perhaps older children too. I suspect that sex education could fix this to some extent. I believe that adolescents are capable of understanding what sex is, and if they are given the right information, I think that if they choose to have sex they are capable of enjoying it and not being frightened by it. Some claim that, regardless of how they feel about it at the time, they will come to regret it later in life and it will have negative affects on their mental health. But this frequently happens with relationships with adults. I'm not sure that it happens more often, or more intensely, as a result of adult-minor relationships. And if it does, that may be due to the feelings of guilt that society gives them, as I described above.

I'm deliberately not being very specific about ages, because I haven't done enough research to know all the necessary facts about sexual and emotional development. But I hope I've given you some idea of my criteria for a minimum age limit. I definitely think there should be one for penetrative sex, but I'm not sure about other acts. Kissing and cuddling surely can't do any harm, and I think it's even open to debate whether gentle fondling could be harmful at any age. After that it gets a bit more complicated.

0 Replies

Hi Agrote

Ive just been reading this thread and have felt compelled to contribute.
I want to avoid getting personal, but i must stress that all of your arguement seems to be based from your uncomfortableness with adult women. Do you think that your lack of experience during your teen years has bred an uncomfortable fear of experienced women your own age focusing your attention on the age of girls where your sexual experimentation should have started or taken place.
Regard your views on consent i am absolutely certain that any parent who has had to repremand their children (into their teens) for bad behaviour of all sorts would agree that that their are many instances where children OFTEN make the wrong choices. I know I made enough when i was young and in hindsight can now see how warped through lack of experience my view on the world was. I am sure you could find a 13 year old girl who would share intimacy with you and probably love you, but in 5 or 10 years time when shes too old for you and looks back at sharing those moments with an adult who wielded an automatic leveredge over her (through age and experience(in life)) do you honestly think that would be positive for her.
You highlighted that you refused the cigarette and joint when you were younger, which is great but i am sure you wouldnt of slept with a 20yr old at age 13 (but maybe the kids smoking with bad judgement might).. Do you smoke now, have you a drugs problem? They certainly might and I think the analogy applies sexually, I would hazard a guess that many young girls who end up as prostitutes in this country are not from the crowd who refused the cigarette or the quickie with the older lad.....
No matter what you say I believe entering into sexual relations at a young age with an older man will only taint her sexuality and be the seed of problems for the future....
Also do you not think it odd that you have probably less sexual experience than anyone else on here and your view is so vastly different? Do you honestly think thats coincidental? Do you honestly think you understand exactly what the sexual experience entails mentally?
I would appreciate an honest answer to the last points?
Grey

0 Replies

I think that the author of this thread seems more interested in arguing the academic side of this (as well as the subj. of incest) and less interested in the practical. As you see by the quoted sources, he's very familiar with the debate. I'd love to see him discuss this face-to-face with the responsible parents of a 12-13 yr old. All that academic theoretical discussion would dissolve pretty quickly.

0 Replies

Ragman wrote:

I'd love to see him discuss this face-to-face with the responsible parents of a 12-13 yr old. All that academic theoretical discussion would dissolve pretty quickly.

But surely this is an academic issue? Science, sociology etc. are potent tools for determining what is true about sexual development or sexual practice. And philosophy can help us determine what sexual practices are or are not morally acceptable.

The emotions of 'responsible parents' are not necessarily a reliable guide to what is really best for their children. For example, I saw a thread elsewhere about a vegan couple who malnourished their child. Those parents may have felt that it was wrong to feed their child animal products, but the knowledge of nutritionists trumps the feelings of the parents. Nutritionists are much more likely to know what food is best for a child, so if nutritionists find that animal products are an important part of a child's diet, then the vegan parents need to take this on board.

If it is determined academically that sex between adults and adolescents is a good, harmless, healthy thing, then it doesn't matter if uninformed parents disagree.

0 Replies

This post is pretty long, so I've split it in half, just in case that make it easier to respond.

kraybald wrote:

I want to avoid getting personal, but i must stress that all of your arguement seems to be based from your uncomfortableness with adult women. Do you think that your lack of experience during your teen years has bred an uncomfortable fear of experienced women your own age focusing your attention on the age of girls where your sexual experimentation should have started or taken place.

This is personal and off-topic, but you are being polite and not threatening to kill me, so I'll respond. Plus, I like talking about myself.

It's a plausible theory, but it isn't accurate. I have been attracted to early adolescents since I was one myself, so it is not something that has emerged following my teenage years. Of course, when I was 12/13, it seemed perfectly normal to be attracted to girls as young as 12/13, and it wasn't until I was 15 that I realised I had an unusual taste in women. But the attraction had been there all along, from the start of my teenage years, so no it was not bred by lack of experience during my teenage years.

Quote:

Regard your views on consent i am absolutely certain that any parent who has had to repremand their children (into their teens) for bad behaviour of all sorts would agree that that their are many instances where children OFTEN make the wrong choices. I know I made enough when i was young and in hindsight can now see how warped through lack of experience my view on the world was. I am sure you could find a 13 year old girl who would share intimacy with you and probably love you, but in 5 or 10 years time when shes too old for you and looks back at sharing those moments with an adult who wielded an automatic leveredge over her (through age and experience(in life)) do you honestly think that would be positive for her.

A few points here. Firstly, I personally am not exclusively attracted to teenagers, and so if I formed a loving relationship with a young girl, this could last indefinitely. She would not be 'too old' after 5 or 10 years; my sexual attraction to her might become less intense, but that happens in all long-term relationships. When married couples grow old, their lust for one another dies down, but the love can continue.

Secondly, a number of people look back on childhood/adolescent sexual experiences with adults as positive times in their life. There are some examples here: http://www.cerius.org/child/index.htm#FM.

Thirdly, when adolescents do grow up to regret such relationships, in many cases this can be attributed to their being taught that sex between adults and minors is wrong, or something to feel guilty about. If the long-term harm of these relationships is caused by society's belief that they are wrong, then it doesn't make sense to say that this long-term harm makes them wrong. If we didn't believe sex with minors was wrong, feelings of guilt and regret might disappear, and sex with minors would no longer cause long-term emotional harm, and therefore might not be wrong. Does that make sense? I can try to clarify this point if need be.

Fourthly, in cases where a teenage relationship goes wrong due to lack of experience, this can sometimes be attributed to poor sex education, rather than the relationship itself. One of the anecdotes in above link supports this idea:

Quote:

The sex this 18-year-old had with a college freshman when she was twelve was not a positive experience, but she says it could have been and should have been, had she been taught better. "Someone should have told me, my family should have not ignored the possibility of me having sex. I realized that they did not care enough to ever prepare me for the most important aspect of life."

Fifthly, remember that many adults look back on adult relationships with regret. Perhaps, when you take away the regret that is caused by society's condemnation of minor-adult relationships, all that remains is a normal risk of heartbreak, betrayal of trust, rushing into things too soon, etc. - no more than with ordinary adult relationships.

0 Replies

Quote:

You highlighted that you refused the cigarette and joint when you were younger, which is great but i am sure you wouldnt of slept with a 20yr old at age 13 (but maybe the kids smoking with bad judgement might).. Do you smoke now, have you a drugs problem? They certainly might and I think the analogy applies sexually, I would hazard a guess that many young girls who end up as prostitutes in this country are not from the crowd who refused the cigarette or the quickie with the older lad.....

Yes, I do now smoke cannabis occasionally. I have wanted to since I was about 14 and I read about it and was informed of the dangers. One of the risks was that it can exaggurate negative feelings such as unhappiness or anxiety, and that it is therefore best done with a group of trusted friends when you are in a happy mood. I waited patiently, about 4 years, for that moment to come. Why? Because I had read a book about recreational drug abuse when I was an early teen, and the information that it contained helped me to make an informed decision about when I was ready to try cannabis.

The point of this anecdote was to illustrate that, given the right information, adolescents are capable of making sensible decisions which they do not later regret. The teenagers who sleep around and overindulge in drugs are badly informed about the risks involved with what they are doing. They don't know how to take drugs or have sex safely, in ways which they will remember fondly. In my school the drugs education was poor. The only thing I can remember learning from it was actually a lie: "Drugs are for people who are unhappy with life." That simply isn't true, and it did not influence me or some of my peers - we laughed at it. Many people of normal levels of happiness take drugs occasionally just for a bit of fun, like going ice-skating.

So the school didn't do its job, and many of my peers drank or smoked too much and came to regret it later. The Dorling Kindersley book that I had read (called 'Drugs Info File') didn't merely try to discourage drug use, but actually taught you how to minimise the risks if you did choose to take drugs. I believe that if more peopel at my school had read this book, they would have made much better decisions. I think that poor teenage decisions are very often due to lack of knowledge, rather than lack of maturity. This applies to sex as well.

Quote:

Also do you not think it odd that you have probably less sexual experience than anyone else on here and your view is so vastly different? Do you honestly think thats coincidental? Do you honestly think you understand exactly what the sexual experience entails mentally?
I would appreciate an honest answer to the last points?

No, I don't think it's a coincidence. One of the reasons that I lack sexual experience is that it's relatively rare for me to be interested in someone who is over the age of consent. Not extremely rare, but uncommon enough that I simply have a reduced oppurtunity to find a legal sexual partner. And it is also rare for me to meet people who are under the age of consent - plus, sex with those people is illegal, and the law is quite a strong deterrant. You seem to be suggesting that my lack of experience might be the cause of my abnormal sexuality, but I think it is the other way around: I think that my unusual sexuality has made it difficult (in the context of my society) for me to have had much sexual experience.

There are other reasons for my lack of experience which might also be linked to my sexuality, such as low self-esteem and shyness. I was one of these teenagers who, rightly or wrongly, feels like he is 'different' from
everyone else, and feels isolated because of that. One of the differences that I noticed was sexual... my peers would drool over women with big tits, and I couldn't really join in with that. And thinking that you are 'different' from everyone else can lead to thinking that you are inferior to others, and you can lose self-confidence and become very timid and shy. This makes it difficult to find a girlfriend. So I do think there is a causal link between my sexuality and my bad luck with the opposite sex, but I think you've got it backwards: my (biologically determined) sexuality, among other things, has caused me to fail at forming relationships. Not the other way around.

0 Replies

age of consent

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know