Robert Gentel wrote:
In other words,
YOUR intelligence is so relatively MAGNIFICENT that u need to start a FLAME WAR
on Boomer 's thread, because u r not enuf of a gentleman to be civil.
Did I get that right?
David, even if you aren't calling others idiots I think what you are saying
is far more offensive. Second guessing the suffering from sexual abuse
is one of the more prevalent sources of ongoing suffering abuse victims face.
When I had posted that, u had mentioned a suicide, but DrewDad
had not yet stated that he had been abused by women, as a child.
It was my vu that this was not sufficient evidence of ill effects
(as of that time) to justify legal interference with a boy
endeavoring to get sexual satisfaction from a female of any age
approximately equal to his own, or older. As of that point in time,
no poster had complained of injury from sexuality with a woman.
I was of the opinion that the mention of the suicide was not
sufficient information, without more, to justify legal interference.
U subsequently revealed much more information about the suicide,
which was certainly impressive. As I read about The Family, I felt it
to be unhealthy, indeed, I had a sickening feeling in my stomach,
which is unusual for me; (not unique, but very unusual).
To say that their very real pain is "idle superstition" is something that is going to deeply offend people,
even those who haven't been abused themselves but who can empathize with those who have been.
I said that before the arrival of additional information
about the murder & suicide of Ricky,
and before DrewDad said that he had been abused by a woman,
in his childhood.
Accordingly, I felt that there was insufficient evidence
of any ill effects -- thay were merely ASSUMED;
subsequently, evidence was
forthcoming. I acknowledge that.
You like to say that when men do it it's "perverted" but when women do it it is not,
but this shows very little understanding of paraphilia (a more scientific term for "perversion").
Tho I find this area of concern to be very interesting, I have not researched it.
Accordingly, u r correct
about the paucity of my knowledge of this subject.
I was only raising questions.
Given that the women in question were 17 and 23 this was not a
large chronophilia (the paraphilia when one's pychosexual age is
discordant with one's chronological age) if at all.
I deem that to be a rational argument, and I concede the point.
In both cases it still represents sexual impropriety to me, in that
an 11-year old is often not emotionally and physically prepared for
sexual activity, but it may well be the case that you were.
I certainly assumed that to be the case. I never questioned it.
Thru out my life, my feelings have been the same about sex.
However it is highly untoward for you to suggest that because
of this experience there is no such beast as pedophilia in women.
It has not been my belief that adult women have no interest in boys
(as I write this, I now remember another one when I was 9, whose advances I did not accept)
but rather, it was in my mind that the same way that I enjoyed MY
freedom in this matter,
it shoud not be ruined for boys who will live later in time.
My vu of what makes life worthwhile are: freedom and pleasure;
libertarianism and hedonism, not
only for ME
, but for all citizens.
It pains me when I see things getting worsefor kids who follow
(e.g., shorter or loss of summer vacations from school).
of life, the FUN
, shoud be taken very seriously.
I am not kidding
around when I say that.
As I see it, this is a matter of the most intense importance.
, I recognize
that part of hedonism is avoidance of pain.
sexual contact with adult women really IS
going to endanger kids
with emotional pain, then a cost-benefits analysis is in order
(in addition to cognition of the natural rights of the kids).
The existence of female hebephilia, ephebophilia and pedophilia is well documented
and what you experienced was simply not very far along the
spectrum of the paraphilia out there.
Upon the basis
of the information that u provided qua The Family, I must agree
that it was not very far along that spectrum. Differences of age
were the only
unusual elements in the sexual experiences that I mentioned.
Except for that, the encounters were fully normal.
I'll ask you again, do you have a line anywhere? Is a two-year old fair game?
Until u raised this question, I have never considered
this issue; it just never occurred to me
. I did not draw a line.
I know two year old males who were sexually abused by females.
They enjoyed it at the time but later grew to deeply resent the experience.
That 's more than I know.
I have never met any (tho I don 't usually discuss this much).
There views shoud be taken into consideration in drawing legislation,
as well as boys who had contrary effects, so as to be fair to everyone.
Here is an example of one such case
. The guy murdered one of the women
who participated in the abuse in 2005 and then took his own life
. As a child he expressed interest in the sexual activity being given him, but he lacked the maturity to give informed consent and it came to haunt him.
Your case represented a much smaller chronological discrepancy that Ricky's abuse started at and while it may not have been harmful to your estimation I urge you to consider that in other cases it can be, and that your particular experiences lacked many of the contributing factors that can make it so (such as authority figures, greater psychosexual vs chronological discrepancy and more).
I was completely free.
Both as a boy and as an adult, I have declined sexual overtures
of women to whom I was not attracted. That does not happen every day,
but it has happened, over the years.
If u will permit me to take a devil 's advocate position for a moment,
or the posture of defense counsel:
the description of Ricky 's misadventures leading to murder and suicide
were indeed startling and the circumstances of his youth were sickening,
but: can we know that no homicide and no suicide woud have
occurred in the absence of his being exposed to twisted
(e.g., witnessing his mother in orgies) ?
The description of his experience included assertions of
and "rapes and beatings".
In fairness, that is very different than simply making love.
One of the reasons that this is such a polemic subject is that there
are relatively normal sexual attitudes that include such attractions.
There are adolescent males and females that healthy adults can feel
physical attraction for. But the realization that their physical and
emotional maturity may not be ready for sexual activity is what
should hold adults back and serve as a barrier to prevent predation
on weaker emotional beings.
The weak shoud be defended from oppression.
The question before us, as I understand it,
concerns government endeavoring to prevent an 11 year old boy
from sexual contact with a girl of 17 or of 23 years, if thay BOTH desire pleasure.
I grew up in a group that preached that there was nothing wrong with adult/child sex.
And I do acknowledge that the girls who were abused often suffered more
than the boys who were. But that you were a willing participant at the time
means little, many of the girls I knew were as well, and among the girls
and boys alike many came to suffer very profoundly from their premature exposure to sexual activity.
Is it possible to describe the ill effects with greater specificity ?
While it is certainly true that some may view the experience positively
it is very little harm to them to erect the barrier that protects those who don't.
I 'd have been much more likely
to harvest the available opportunity than to be concerned about others.
I am a selfish person now; I was a much, much more selfish person in my youth.
Their was no chance at all that I 've have cared about
the will of the collective, as represented in the law.
I surely woud have subordinated that to my own pleasure,
unless I saw that someone else 's rights were explicitly being violated on a tangible basis by my conduct.
For example, I 'd not have intentionally harmed someone else
You having to wait till you were able to give informed consent
is worth the many lives destroyed by those who didn't get that opportunity,
The passage of time is perceived very differently
by the young than by the old. To them, a year feels like forever.
and I urge you to consider that your experience may have been
positive for you, while the societal barrier still makes sense
in order to prevent the harm to those to whom it would not.
Yes; I will consider it. U have brought interesting n valuable ideas
to my attention. However, there remains the question of whether
the young (or the less young)
shall willingly subordinate their passions
to the law.
Do u think that thay will ?
Historically, how well has that worked out ?