age of consent

Thanks for your honest replies agrote

Im sure the feelings you have for younger girls to you seems right and proper, as you personally judge it to simply be a sexual orientation.

But I still hold the view that there is an uneven level of power wielded by a grown man when with a child, which cannot be argued away, full stop.

And to me this is where the arguement lies. Some girls may be physically able and maybe with a boy her own age might even engage in sexual activity, but there will always be a disadvantage to a girl of such age with a grown man.

I would whole heartedly recommend that you at least try and sway your amore to women closer to your own age, as you seem a bright lad but im sure that your sexual desires as they are (which even by the conversations you are engaging here are being propogated) can only lead to a bad place for you in the future.

K

0 Replies

kraybald wrote:

But I still hold the view that there is an uneven level of power wielded by a grown man when with a child, which cannot be argued away, full stop.

I agree with this, but I don't see how it makes the behaviour 'wrong'. There seems to be a premise missing. An imbalance of power doesn't always make us think that some terrible exploitation is going on.

Skiing instructors have more skiing experience than their students, and they may even be much older and stronger than their students. But is it wrong to teach beginners how to ski?

I doesn't seem to necessarily be wrong to engage in something with someone who has less power or experience than you. I think there must be another feature of consentual sex with adolescents that makes it wrong, if it is wrong. An imbalance of power doesn't seem to be enough.

Quote:

I would whole heartedly recommend that you at least try and sway your amore to women closer to your own age, as you seem a bright lad but im sure that your sexual desires as they are (which even by the conversations you are engaging here are being propogated) can only lead to a bad place for you in the future.

You mean prison? Don't worry, I'm not going to do anything stupid.

0 Replies

I dont really think your analogy comes anywhere close to be honest.

If your ski instructor forced you to get your skis on and at least have a go on the slope and you did and enjoyed it, great, looking back im sure youd thank him.
If you apply this to a sexual experience , i cannot imagine you would look back with such fond memories....

0 Replies

kraybald wrote:

I dont really think your analogy comes anywhere close to be honest.

If your ski instructor forced you to get your skis on and at least have a go on the slope and you did and enjoyed it, great, looking back im sure youd thank him.
If you apply this to a sexual experience , i cannot imagine you would look back with such fond memories....

But it's not the imbalance of power that makes it so. A girl or boy (or ex-girl/boy) might look back on teenage sex and feel bad about it, but that can't be because there was an imbalance of power. There's an imbalance of power in the skiing example, yet the memories of skiing are happy memories, so if this doesn't happen with sex then there must be a reason other than the imbalance of power.

If consensual sex with adolescents is wrong or harmful, it is not because of the imbalance of power. There must be some other reason. Any ideas?

0 Replies

Actually, I'm liking the ski instructor analogy.

Adult ski instructor is not doing so well and needs to get some more students. He approaches a young teenager -- say 13 -- and convinces her that she really needs to learn how to ski. She's not sure, and she can't quite afford it, but he really turns on the charm and eventually she decides to go ahead with it.

The first day she's nervous and explains that she hasn't really ever skied before, he assures her that it'll be fine and she'll have a lot of fun, that he's given lessons to many other people and they were all happy with it. She remains nervous, but again he is able to override that. She gets on the skis.

Despite the instructor's best attempts, the first run (which was on a difficult hill rather than an easy one, because the rates are higher and the ski instructor thought she could handle it) goes terribly. She crashes into a tree and gets a spinal injury, and recovers to the point where she can walk again, but she never again has the kind of free range of motion that she did before it happened.

Various points:

1.) She gave her consent -- but was it truly informed consent? (An older, more powerful, more adept person was able to convince her that she wanted to do something. Teenagers are extremely easy to manipulate in this way.)

2.) Not every student of the instructor's crashed into a tree and got a spinal injury -- nonetheless, he took several steps that made that bad outcome more LIKELY.

3.) He had no way of knowing beforehand whether this would be a successful or unsuccessful gambit; whether the student would benefit or whether the student would be significantly harmed.

And that's what it comes down to. You have been shown, over and over again, that there is harm that frequently occurs when there is sex between an adult and a minor. Does that mean that harm happens 100% of the time? No. But since you don't have a crystal ball, and have no way of knowing whether a given situation in which a minor submits to your advances will result in harm or not, the chance of harm is way too high, for reasons we have laid out repeatedly. (Such as the absence of truly informed consent.) Since the risk of harm is too high -- for many people, much more severe harm than limited range of motion after a spinal cord injury -- it is cruel for you to seriously consider inflicting such harm.

0 Replies

(waits to see if more debate ensues when there is nothing left to debate ...just more justification)

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

You have been shown, over and over again, that there is harm that frequently occurs when there is sex between an adult and a minor.

everything

0 Replies

Ragman wrote:

(waits to see if more debate ensues when there is nothing left to debate ...just more justification)

What, exactly, is wrong with trying to justify my views? If my justification fails, then it fails. If somebody argues me into a corner, and I can no longer reasonably say that minor-adult sex is okay, then I will have to admit defeat. This has not happened yet.

Not that I've won... plenty of intelligent people (not you) are still managing to form counter-arguments to my counter-arguments, and the debate is continuing. But I haven't lost, that's the point. If I'm wrong, I don't know it yet. And more importantly, neither do you, since you have not managed (or attempted) to refute my claims. I think you're the one clutching at straws.

0 Replies

Agrote, purely hypothetical question, removed from context here.

Say that it has been well-established, through rigorous, double-blind, peer-reviewed studies, that 56% of the time that a person eats tiramisu before the age of 18, they go blind.

Now, tiramisu is wonderful stuff. And hey, 44% of the time there are no ill effects.

Would you give tiramisu to a 14-year-old? Why or why not?

0 Replies

if you really feel that attracted to them then go to a third world country where they get married at like 13

0 Replies

Okay, I have to say that a simple "skiing" story made my flesh crawl.

Agrote,
you are very good at arguing any points thrown at you, but that doesn't make you right. It makes you a great debater.

The world is a many faceted place and you trying to squish it into the way you want to view it, only distorts your picture.

I like Sozobe's question.

0 Replies

caribou wrote:

Okay, I have to say that a simple "skiing" story made my flesh crawl.

Ugh, me too. All of that and-the-big-strong-man-gently-but-firmly-teaches-the-little-girl business-- Jeez.

Agrote, maybe you should take a women's studies course or something-- I think you would benefit from a better understanding of male/female interactions. You don't seem to be aware of the patronizing, controlling side of your interest in young girls, and it's really unpleasant. It came through very clearly in your story there.

0 Replies

cyphercat wrote:

caribou wrote:
Okay, I have to say that a simple "skiing" story made my flesh crawl.

Ugh, me too. All of that and-the-big-strong-man-gently-but-firmly-teaches-the-little-girl business-- Jeez.

Agrote, maybe you should take a women's studies course or something-- I think you would benefit from a better understanding of male/female interactions. You don't seem to be aware of the patronizing, controlling side of your interest in young girls, and it's really unpleasant. It came through very clearly in your story there.

In Ancient Greece, it was big-strong-man-gently-but-firmly-teaches-the-little-boy. Male-female interactions won't tell the whole story about adult-child interactions.

0 Replies

averner wrote:

Male-female interactions won't tell the whole story about adult-child interactions.

Nope, of course it doesn't. It's just that we've all suggested getting counselling, and we've all talked about the research, and we're all banging our heads against a wall...so I thought that might be a way that agrote could get a different perspective that he might actually be open to (ha ha, yeah sure Wink

).

and by the way,welcome to a2k, averner!

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Say that it has been well-established, through rigorous, double-blind, peer-reviewed studies, that 56% of the time that a person eats tiramisu before the age of 18, they go blind.

Now, tiramisu is wonderful stuff. And hey, 44% of the time there are no ill effects.

Would you give tiramisu to a 14-year-old? Why or why not?

Unless I had some extra information about the effects of tiramasu - such as knowledge of how to reduce the risk, or knowledge of how to recognise which under-18s will go blind and which won't - then no, I wouldn't give it to a 14-year-old. I'm not sure how small the risk would have to be for me to change my mind (there's always a risk of harm with sex, even amongst adults), but it seems clear that a 56% chance of serious, permanent harm is too much.

Of course, there would be no reason for me to refrain from 'feeding other cakes to' (read: performing non-penetrative sexual acts with) adolescents, should they wish to eat them.

Now all you need to do is find some double-blind, peer-revieved studies that indicate that sex with under-18s carries a high risk of permanent physical damage. I'll wait patiently.

averner wrote:

if you really feel that attracted to them then go to a third world country where they get married at like 13

I don't particularly want to go and live in the third world. Plus, I'd rather meet someone who speaks my language fluently.

caribou wrote:

Okay, I have to say that a simple "skiing" story made my flesh crawl.

I reckon you should leave your flesh out of this. Use your brain instead.

Quote:

you are very good at arguing any points thrown at you, but that doesn't make you right.

Agreed. Nor does it make me wrong.

Quote:

The world is a many faceted place and you trying to squish it into the way you want to view it, only distorts your picture.

Which facts have I been squishing, exactly?

cyphercat wrote:

...we've all suggested getting counselling, and we've all talked about the research, and we're all banging our heads against a wall...so I thought that might be a way that agrote could get a different perspective that he might actually be open to (ha ha, yeah sure ).

Do you think you could remind me of the research? As far as I remember, nobody in this thread provided any research which was inconsistent with my beliefs.

You may have noticed that I respond positively to well-formulated arguments, scientific evidence, thought experiments etc. You could try producing those. If you're unable to, then not only will you not convince me that I am wrong, but you yourself will have no good reason to believe that I am wrong, and that consensual sex with minors is harmful. Without reason and rationality to support your beliefs, your beliefs are nothing more than prejudicial. And prejudice is very dangerous.

0 Replies

Not a conclusive report but it highlights many of the problems and risks posed by under age sex....

......www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/312/7028/390?ref=parax.info

0 Replies

So, agrote, if you see solid evidence that sex between adults and teenaged minors is harmful for those minors -- not every single one, but a goodly percentage -- that'll be enough for you? You'll say "oh OK in that case, not worth the risk," and back off of this permanently and completely?

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

So, agrote, if you see solid evidence that sex between adults and teenaged minors is harmful for those minors -- not every single one, but a goodly percentage -- that'll be enough for you? You'll say "oh OK in that case, not worth the risk," and back off of this permanently and completely?

I thought I'd made this clear all along, but apparently not...

If I were to see solid evidence that certain sexual acts*, when performed between adults and teenaged minors, are harmful for those minors, in a significant percentage of cases, then I would back off. I'd stop arguing that such acts should be accepted by society, and I would accept that they need to remain illegal.

I would probably try to investigate whether anything could be done to reduce the risk of harm and make safe sex with adolescents possible (for example, somebody mentioned earlier that teen sex carries a cancer risk, but that it can be reduced to some extent by contraception). But I wouldn't hold out much hope.

---
*Although I don't believe it to be the so, it is plausible that penetrative sex could be physically damaging to adolescents, and other types of sex might also have bad emotional consequences. But I find it hard to believe that consensual kissing, cuddling or even fondling could do much harm to minors; it is important to distinguish between the different types of sexual acts, all of which are illegal with minors.

0 Replies

Then, agrote, go see an expert on this subject!

Get this information!

Why are you asking us?

I am quite certain that there is a significant risk.

I am also a busy person.

Given your response to data so far, (and your willingness to believe things like a patently false website about incest) I hold out very little hope that if I put a great deal of time and energy into finding various studies, they will make a dent on you. That you won't say "yes but..." ad nauseum.

Go meet someone who KNOWS. A counselor, an expert in the field. Who can tell you this stuff, and back it up, and more importantly who has the time and inclination to do so.

If that's the main variable -- go find OUT!

0 Replies

agrote wrote:

sozobe wrote:
So, agrote, if you see solid evidence that sex between adults and teenaged minors is harmful for those minors -- not every single one, but a goodly percentage -- that'll be enough for you? You'll say "oh OK in that case, not worth the risk," and back off of this permanently and completely?

I thought I'd made this clear all along, but apparently not...

If I were to see solid evidence that certain sexual acts*, when performed between adults and teenaged minors, are harmful for those minors, in a significant percentage of cases, then I would back off. I'd stop arguing that such acts should be accepted by society, and I would accept that they need to remain illegal.

I would probably try to investigate whether anything could be done to reduce the risk of harm and make safe sex with adolescents possible (for example, somebody mentioned earlier that teen sex carries a cancer risk, but that it can be reduced to some extent by contraception). But I wouldn't hold out much hope..

In other words, you'd do exactly what you've been doing in this thread. You'd ignore reports and data people provide and claim that they don't really exist and when that fails you'd see if you can find some way to try and weasel around whatever is provided.

Face it, you are going to continue playing games and eventually you'll end up in prison. Then you'll cry about how unfair "the system" is to you.

0 Replies

age of consent

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know