Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Ask a Paedophile

By floridasun in Culture
Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 12:00:00 PM EST
Tags: equality, morals, hysteria, sex, society, freedom, relationships (all tags)
Freedom

No, the subject is not a catch-line.  I really mean it.


This is a difficult topic for many.  If you cannot productively participate in this discussion, please leave it alone for those who can.  Thank you.

Still reading?  Ok.

With today's protracted moral outrage - building up over the last 30 years to the point of national hysteria - I thought it may be interesting to open a discussion on the topic.  Anything's game; anything goes.

It's funny because there seems to have been a rash of think-of-the-children stories on a number of blogs and news sites.  I read comments which rant and ramble about "them."  How "they" are sick, need therapy, castration, execution, and (occasionally) sympathy.  It both amuses and depresses me.  On the one hand, I appreciate that people can form strong opinions over arbitrary things (swearing, an invisible man in the sky, having an orgasm).  But on the other, it's remarkable how destructive these opinions can be, taken to the extreme.

What surprises me is that in these days of Internet anonymity, very few of "us" respond in turn.

I know, statistically speaking, that I'm not alone.  If you have ever used an online usenet picture aggregator, you may have noticed that the groups which generate the most image views (for those that record it) are almost always the young-girl groups, whose subject matter is typically: girls from age 9-12, in their underwear, or less.

These groups consistently beat out the teen erotica groups, and those in turn beat out the "standard" erotica groups, by a wide margin.  As of this writing, both of the two popular "young girl" groups (on one particular aggregator) have over a million picture views over the last couple weeks - by registered, paying members.  And this is one non-anonymous site. Bear in mind that they all have a strict anti-child-porn regulation (which they enforce by deleting/blocking CP images), and that they have hundreds of thousands of subscribers.  These are not seedy backwater sites.

A quick check on any major usenet, freenet, or even web search log, produces similar results.

There are a couple research studies (though procuring funding for one is extremely difficult due to the charged nature of the subject) which have noted that attraction to prepubescent females is common.  One is here:

 http://www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/97-048_article.html

The test was conducted using an errection test aparatus, and slides of naked women, and the next day naked 10 year old girls, were shown to the test subjects.

It notes that, of the some 80 test subjects, "twenty-six subjects exhibited sexual arousal to the child slides that equaled or exceeded their arousal to the adult slides."

The other, a study done in the UK, has been buried and I cannot find it anymore.  If someone has a link, feel free to post it.

So, here I am - knowing full well that I'm not alone.  And yet, so few of us even take the time to respond anonymously to these self-righteous asshats who rant and ramble about how they would like to murder or castrate us.

In any event, let me introduce myself, and tell my story.  If you have a question you've been burning to ask, now is your chance.

I am a paedophile.  Yes, the "worst kind."  Not an ephibophile - I contend that virtually every red blooded male alive today is an ephibophile (or a liar).

I am attracted emotionally, and (here's the rub) sexually to young girls.  How young?  10.. 11.

While I am lucky in that it's not to the exclusion of women my age, it is also not a passing phase and it is not something I try to ignore.

I've felt the way I do for as far back as I can remember.  My first sexual experience (to confirm the suspicions) was at age 9.  I had a crush on two girls (twins) in grade 5, and one day they decided they'd meet me at a tree fort that my father had built.  We "experimented" (strip poker, making out, and fellacio) for several weeks, and eventually lost interest.

A while later, I had (to the best of my ability) sexual intercourse with my babysitter.  I don't remember how old she was, but she was a teenager.  I was quite mature for my age (10), and it was a wonderful experience.

When my mom found out, however... it was not quite as wonderful.  She threatened to have her charged, and I threatened kill myself if she did.  Eventually she lost interest, but it was years before I saw my babysitter again.

Throughout my teenaged years, I knew something was different.  While boys my age were attracted to the mature, voluptuous and sluttly looking magazine women, I was not.  I was still attracted mainly to the grade 7 and 8 girls.

I went through a period of self-loathing in grade 11.  It was terrible.  Everyone wants to fit in, and in this regard, I certainly did not. Eventually I came to realize that no matter what one does or believes in, someone will be offended.  We can't please everyone.  The best we can do is be honest with ourselves.

Later that year, a new family moved next door.  Their daughter was 11.  She used to come to play with my sister (who was her age), and after a few months, was spending more time hanging around me than her.

My mother would always try to intervene and tell her to "leave me alone."  This drove her nuts.  For a few weeks, she would bring over her homework and we'd lie in bed and work on it.  One day, when my family was gone at a wedding, she came over, and we had sex.

This went on for months - waiting for opportunities where we could both sneak out to the (now creaky) tree fort, or when our families would be gone for some predictable amount of time.  Eventually people began to realize what was going on.  Some accepted it, but most did not.  We had to "cool it off" for a while.

So flash forward to today.

She is 19.  A month and 3 days ago, I proposed to her.  She accepted.  In a year, we will be married.

She is comfortable with my "condition," and in fact shares it (though to a lesser extent).  Porn nights are a very interesting experience.

I recognize that to a devout Christian, we are both going to hell.  We've agreed to cross that bridge when we come to it. For now, we're living our lives.

So - that's it.  One person's story.

Do you have a question you'd like to ask?  Here is a quick FAQ to keep the signal-to-noise ratio up:

Q: What do you mean "emotional attraction?"

A: This may seem ridiculous to you, but it's the best way I can explain it.  I don't see girls as property or stupid annoying little "kids."  Sure, some girls are pretty dumb.  More generally, some people are pretty dumb.  But all of the girlfriends I've had over the years have been very intelligent (if sometimes naive), interesting people who I, at the time, fell in love with.

That is, I just liked to be with them, and talk to them.  I felt bad when we were apart.  Eventually I married one.  If you've never talked WITH a young person (as opposed to TO a young person), you won't understand.  It takes a lot of time before they "drop their guard" (we're friends.. I don't tell you what to do) but if you're honest, it can become a wonderful relationship.  Hint: they're not stupid.  Yes, they're usually inexperienced.  But talk to them like they're stupid, and they'll react in turn.  They play "kid" as well as we play "adult."

Q: You're going to burn in hell.  I want to kill you.  Die!

A: Ok.  If you took your own religion seriously, you wouldn't want to kill me.  So you're a hypocrite.  Reevaluate your priorities in life.

Q: I was raped when I was younger, and I blame it on you.

A: I'm sorry you went through that.  I hope you can heal.  Rape is one of the most inhumane acts that can happen.  However, our society has a twisted way of equating sex with rape.  Just because YOU don't approve of sex between people, does NOT mean they're raping each other.  So please don't blame me.  It isn't fair.

Q: Kids don't have the mental capacity blah blah blah.

A: Neither do most adults (yes I've had several adult gfs).

Q: Where do you live?  What's your IP?

A: In the US.  I wish things were different, and I wish I could be more specific.  I wish I didn't have to mask my IP address and set up anonymous email accounts.  Unfortunately, however, there are too many dangerous people out there who are unable to control their emotions and have a "strong moral composition."  Call my crazy, but I think my fiance might get upset if you protected her by killing or jailing me.

Q: You have no morals!  Why don't you have any morals?

A: You're right - I have no morals.  With each and every action I take, I simply take a do-unto-others approach.  Am I hurting someone by doing this?  When I think of so-called morals, I think of the twisted justifications for war, throwing witches down wells, and stoning teenaged girls for illegal sex.  No thanks; I'll make up my own mind on the issues.  And by the way - it wasn't always this way (fear of sex is a new phenominon), and it's not this way in every country.  Gain some perspective.

Q: But you're hurting your partners!

A: Isn't it a little arrogant of you to assume that someone who you don't know and have never met - someone you know NOTHING about - is incapable of deciding for herself whether or not she's being hurt?

Q: I think you should see a psychologist.

A: I've long passed the point where this issue was causing me mental anguish, and as such feel no need to discuss it with a psychologist.  My fiance concurs. :)

Q: Are you new to k5?

A: No.  Many of you know me under a different nym.  Can you guess who I am? :)  In all seriousness, please do not accuse anyone of being me.  The accusation can be devastating, and very few guesses would be right.  Let's not start a witch-hunt.

Q: What does the future hold?

A: Global warming, world war 3, and an asteroid striking the earth.  Hopefully before then, our species will take a step back and realize how ridiculous it is to hate sex and love, and love hate and violence.  We can dream.

--------

One last plea.  Please, TRY not to turn this into a giant flamewar.  If you can't help it, and you MUST post some bile, please keep it short and to the point.  If you're uncomfortable voting on this story, don't vote.

If you're writing words of understanding, support or comiseration, I urge you to consider using an alternate account.  I've seen first-hand what can happen to someone accused of "supporting the pedos."

Rusty, if this topic is illegal to discuss (you'd know better than me, and free speech only goes so far), or inappropriate kuro5hin, please freeze my account.  I won't take it as an insult; I know your hands may be tied.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
This story makes me:
o Happy 31%
o Sad 22%
o Uncomfortable 11%
o Angry 8%
o Confused 17%
o Frustrated 8%

Votes: 35
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Kuro5hin
o http://www .ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/97-048_article.html
o Also by floridasun


Display: Sort:
Ask a Paedophile | 668 comments (628 topical, 40 editorial, 24 hidden)
serious question (2.33 / 12) (#1)
by GhostOfTiber on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 04:53:29 PM EST

How much do you hang out on 4chan?

[Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne

Never heard of it.. (2.16 / 6) (#3)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 05:06:08 PM EST

What is it?

[ Parent ]
now THAT is going too far (2.60 / 5) (#9)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:08:01 PM EST

if you were a regular k5 user you would have heard of 4chan, adequacy, fark, slashdot etc. Come on. Even I have and I don't go anywhere near them.

Either you're lying now, or else you were lying when you said you weren't a newb (and I notice that you implied you had several accounts here).

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

sorry.. (2.00 / 7) (#11)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:14:01 PM EST

I read /. and I've heard of fark, but never 4chan or adequacy.  I'm sorry...

[ Parent ]
so you've been here for a while (2.33 / 6) (#20)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:40:34 PM EST

yet you've never once come across a single one of these comments, ever? Mmmmmm hmmmm.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
To be fair... (3.00 / 6) (#120)
by Stjck on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:52:28 PM EST

I only ever found out about 4chan I month or two ago when I started using this place again so it is possible to never hear about them and adequacy was years ago. I'd forgotten all about it until you mentioned it.

[ Parent ]
rly? ok then (3.00 / 3) (#122)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:16:30 PM EST

maybe I'm just prone to observing this stuff. I still get the distinct feeling we're being lied to though.

For example they seem to imply they're masking their ip.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

huh? (2.33 / 3) (#143)
by binford2k on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:41:50 AM EST

well, post a comment explaining what it is.  I have no clue what you're talking about either.  guess it's google time.

[ Parent ]
4chan (2.66 / 3) (#145)
by binford2k on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:46:22 AM EST

it's an image board with images ranging from naked chicks to computer mods to guns.  What does that have to do with pedophilia?

[ Parent ]
why don't you pick on my wikipedia comment (3.00 / 2) (#156)
by livus on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:34:05 AM EST

I am not here to explain teh internets to you, Im too busy trying to remember which kuron had sexual experiences as a child with twin girls.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
lol (3.00 / 3) (#171)
by American Virgo on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:19:32 AM EST

That was copy pasta

[ Parent ]
Oh, it's all pure lies (2.33 / 3) (#165)
by Stjck on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:29:47 AM EST

I was just pointing out that it was possible.

[ Parent ]
Actually... (none / 1) (#631)
by vectro on Sun Dec 31, 2006 at 01:05:25 PM EST

I've been here for years (check my history), but this is the first time I've ever heard of 4chan.

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]
Me neither (none / 1) (#667)
by localman on Thu Jan 18, 2007 at 12:58:03 AM EST

I've been on slashdot and k5 since before y2k and I've never heard of 4chan.  Or if I have I forgot about it completely.

[ Parent ]
pedobear seal of approval on this story (1.50 / 2) (#646)
by newb4b0 on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 07:04:43 PM EST


http://www.netmoneychat.com| NetMoneyChat Forums. No Registration necessary. Ya'll.
[ Parent ]

-1, NULLO \> (1.61 / 13) (#2)
by buck on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 05:00:13 PM EST


-----
“You, on the other hand, just spew forth your mental phlegmwads all over the place and don't have the goddamned courtesy to throw us a tissue afterwards.” -- kitten
Why do you like anime? (3.00 / 9) (#5)
by The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 05:37:03 PM EST

Seriously.

___
I'm a pompous windbag, I take myself far too seriously, and I single-handedly messed up K5 by causing the fiction section to be created. --localroger

Lol (3.00 / 2) (#306)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:51:25 PM EST

As a matter of fact I do! :)

But not so much for what you're thinking.  Anime is deeeeeeep man.

[ Parent ]

THIS STORY GETS THE PEDOBEAR SEAL OF APPROVAL! /nt (2.58 / 17) (#6)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 05:40:35 PM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


do u like Care Bears? (2.28 / 7) (#93)
by kurogirl on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:32:47 PM EST

I like bears!

do you beleive in love at first sigh or would you like me to walk past again?
[ Parent ]

do you like zeros? n (2.25 / 4) (#126)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:27:48 PM EST



---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
I have a question(s) (2.73 / 26) (#7)
by Stjck on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:00:49 PM EST

I have a number of nieces and nephews. Far too many in fact. What are the current market prices for selling them to the sex trade? Will there be any commissions involved? Is now a good time to sell or buy?

What is the aim of this story? (2.61 / 13) (#10)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:13:22 PM EST

What's its purpose? The q's are all from straw men, the story rambles, and the point gets lost somewhere. Plus it seems to have moved out of edit too soon.

However, I think the answer to my question is found here:

"Many of you know me under a different nym.  Can you guess who I am? :)  In all seriousness, please do not accuse anyone of being me.  The accusation can be devastating, and very few guesses would be right.  Let's not start a witch-hunt."

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

I guess it's not for you.. (2.60 / 5) (#13)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:22:14 PM EST

There was no nefarious purpose to this story.  Its purpose was to open a dialog on the subject at k5.  Drop the conspiracy theories.

If you don't like what you're reading, that's fine.  It's Sunday, I was bored and just finished reading another let's-feel-good-and-hate-the-pedos news article, and thought I'd waste an hour of my time writing this.

If someone reads it, and feels a sense of relief and "I'm not alone," then it was worth it.

[ Parent ]

thats the most fucked up part of this (1.80 / 5) (#199)
by Zombie Schrodingers Cat on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:10:29 PM EST

pedos cause a great deal of harm to society. Your own wife is now as fucked up as you are because you raped her when she was eleven. You're trying to use moral relativism to gain some sort of acceptance from society.

Moral relativism has its limits. There is a certain line that you cross where you have to say "I don't care where you're from, that's just fucked up." You have crossed that line.

What you have done is wrong. It doesn't matter how many people out there are like you, it doesn't make what you've done right. And psychologically damaging others (like you did to your wife) so that they become like you just makes it all the more evil. Your wife could have had a normal life if it weren't for you.

You are arguing that if a large number of people think a certain way that makes it right. But you fail to realise that a larger number of people would want to beat you to death for being a pedophile. According to your own moral relativism these people are right simple because of their numbers.

[ Parent ]

You are implying that... (2.25 / 4) (#348)
by Zombie Schrodingers Cat on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:12:35 PM EST

because the "line" is dependent on the way I've been brought up and socially conditioned that that makes it arbitrary. Right and wrong are not arbitrary. They are based on our history, our culture. Our entire civilization has been built around our code of morals, some of which are codified into law. You should not cast this moral code aside lightly.

And maybe their are cultures where this guy's actions might be considered acceptable. But can any of these cultures be considered to be successful? Are these cultures actually helping anyone?


[ Parent ]

Daaaamn. (none / 1) (#359)
by nightfire on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:50:01 PM EST

Damn man..

And maybe their are cultures where this guy's actions might be considered acceptable. But can any of these cultures be considered to be successful? Are these cultures actually helping anyone?

You are SUCH an American.

(sorry.. no offense to the other more travelled yanks. :)  I know you're out there.)

[ Parent ]

Sorry not an american... (2.25 / 4) (#398)
by Zombie Schrodingers Cat on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 08:41:47 AM EST

But it is interesting that you consider aspects of American culture to be wrong, yet all other cultures are above reproach.

The Iraq war is something that was produced by American culture. Since American pornography is obsessed with anal sex, that makes it part of American culture. Moral relativism dictates that anything that is cultural is acceptible, therefore Americans sodomising Iraqi prisoners is perfectly acceptible. Right?

Wrong. American culture is wrong about many things. Like I said, moral relativism only goes so far. I'm fine with Americans being loudmouth fatasses if that is what their culture is. I'll just avoid them. But when they harm someone then they've crossed the "That's fucked up" line.

Muslims can dictate that women must never be seen with a man that is not her husband or a relative. Not a culture I'd want to be part of, but if that's what they want, I'm cool with it. But if they decide to stone a woman to death? That's just fucked up. I don't care if its part of their culture or not. Its just wrong.

Raping children? I don't care what your culture is or where you're from. It's just wrong.

[ Parent ]

I bet you... (3.00 / 2) (#668)
by localman on Thu Jan 18, 2007 at 01:12:16 AM EST

I don't condone sex with eleven year olds, and I don't claim to know what the impact is of that kind of thing.  But I think it's something that isn't discussed with full honesty today.  I bet you that many many people in your ancestry were eleven years old when they first had consensual sex.  I know that a few hundred years ago this was extremely common in almost any culture you may have come from.  And those cultures, by virtue of having produced you, must be "useful" in some loose definition that you hold.

In today's society, there are serious questions that need to be asked on this topic, and I don't take them lightly or claim to have the answers.  Maybe it is a universally bad thing.  But first it would be helpful if we all realized that from a purely naturalistic, historical point of view, humans can have sex as soon as we want, and hormones kick in by age 12 for most people.  I know that I was very sexually curious at age 9 or so and experemented in small ways with friends.  I don't know what the impact would have been if an older girl had been involved, but it certainly wouldn't have been rape.

Cheers.

[ Parent ]

pedos cause... (2.00 / 2) (#471)
by AngelKnight on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:43:19 PM EST

Assuming you're going by the definition of pedophilia as one that includes female humans of appropriate age to be biologically capable of bearing children...

...I think you just indicted every Korean over age 40.  Nice.

[ Parent ]

Troll? (2.50 / 8) (#12)
by imexius on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:21:45 PM EST

Am I the only one who thinks this article is a massive troll?

I shouldn't have written that part (2.16 / 6) (#15)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:28:09 PM EST

about guessing who I am.  I figured I'd preempt someone else's comment accusing so-and-so here of being the author.  But it didn't exactly come out the way I expected. :(

Anyway, it's the Internet so believe it or not.  It's up to you.  I would recommend reading at least the linked study, if you think this is a troll.

[ Parent ]

Because trolls never link to studies. n (2.40 / 5) (#18)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:36:54 PM EST



---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
No I think it's a massive troll too. (2.66 / 6) (#17)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:36:10 PM EST

Aside from anything else the writing style's reminiscent of The Troll Who Trolled Me (or one of them).

Also note that the story strongly implies that him and his fiance are supposedly out there molesting children.  Now why would someone who was doing something like that admit it on teh internet.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

i agree (2.71 / 7) (#21)
by GhostOfTiber on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:42:22 PM EST

c'mon, he didn't know about paedochan

[Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne
[ Parent ]

He probably doesnt even edit wikipedia. n (2.66 / 9) (#23)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:45:20 PM EST



---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
tsk tsk (2.00 / 6) (#26)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:48:17 PM EST

"This is a difficult topic for many.  If you cannot productively participate in this discussion, please leave it alone for those who can.  Thank you."

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
if you don't get my jokes don't ask me to (3.00 / 6) (#45)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:14:01 PM EST

explain them; that would ruin it for others.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
Because... (3.00 / 4) (#27)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:50:30 PM EST

If it's a troll they can write it off and return to their consistent little fantasy world.

[ Parent ]
I mentioned my other reasons (2.60 / 5) (#34)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:03:36 PM EST

briefly in comment 10.

It's poorly written. I don't know whether it go flushed out of edit prematurely or what, but what's with the CTS style formatting, the errors, the bossy, patronising authorial tone and what the hell is the point of the story?

It would really benefit from a clearer statement of intention and direction at the beginning and then it should probably be broken up into sections.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

i dont dismiss this without a reason... (1.66 / 6) (#35)
by dakini on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:05:25 PM EST

these people are SICK..they need help or to be put away for a very long time..there are many children in this world who's child like innocense have been ripped from them because of these SICK people..if he walked around in a city and they knew who he was, he would be tossed out of town in a heartbeat..most likely in a wooden box..i cannot tolerate these sicko's, especially if they do not want to get the help they need for their sickness..

" May your vision be clear, your heart strong, and may you always follow your dreams."
[ Parent ]
well, my little friend..you go and tell the (2.75 / 4) (#49)
by dakini on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:25:11 PM EST

tens of thousands of adults who were molested when they were in residential schools years ago..and who are now winning litigation suits against churches and countries..that they should have thought it as no big deal..you tell them when they come in from prostitution or from the bars and streets, that it was all their fault and not the molester..if this had happened to one of my children, your damn right, i would most likely be in jail for fucking murder you moron!!

" May your vision be clear, your heart strong, and may you always follow your dreams."
[ Parent ]
Do you realize that your irrational ranting (2.50 / 6) (#81)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:10:26 PM EST

is not really helping your cause? Specifically, the story linked in another comment which claims adults are better equipped to make informed, rational decisions on emotinally charged subjects. You, ma'am, are the perfect example of an adult who lacks that capability.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
No (3.00 / 3) (#61)
by Psychopath on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:37:30 PM EST

I think there is quite a difference between a slap - which is superficial - and molestation - which goes much more into the body.

Ok, now for a stupid story I just happened to experience (and now, I am not a child anymore). A family I know came and I greeted them; the first girl with a kiss, as I knew it. The second, her sister, just as well. Then came the mum. I don't know why, but a kiss as well.
It might sound harmless and probably for me it is - it was "just" a kiss. But it still occupies me, I wonder whether I was drunk, I cannot think about it clearly, I hate it, I feel seek when thinking about it.

Now I really don't want to know how one feels when (1) this happend forcible (2) not just a kiss, but something which goes more into your body, in your most intimate areas.

P., sorry for by bad words
--
The only antidote to mental suffering is physical pain. -- Karl Marx
[ Parent ]
your first sexual experiences (2.20 / 5) (#204)
by Zombie Schrodingers Cat on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:20:44 PM EST

will have a profound impact impact on you. When you finally get to experience sex for yourself you will understand.

Ideally everyone's first experience should be within a loving relationship. Now we can't guarantee everyone will experience it this way, but the fewer Chester the Molesters there are out there the more likely this will happen.

[ Parent ]

Ah... (none / 1) (#350)
by Zombie Schrodingers Cat on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:17:14 PM EST

The importance of sex comes is inseparable from our genetic evolution. Natural selection has hard coded the "sex is important" all over our genetic code. If you are a human being then sex is important.

So yeah, its pretty much universal.

[ Parent ]

Even if it's entirely socially constructed, (2.50 / 2) (#597)
by mrogers on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 12:11:23 PM EST

does that detract from its importance?

[ Parent ]
Lord knows my first was IMPACTING (none / 1) (#428)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:54:31 AM EST

Both 16.

Me a virgin, her some experience.

Me, taking it easy, it was my first time.

Her, laying there like a log.

Surprised I didn't become celibate after how boring that shit was.

I didn't even get to cum.
.

[ Parent ]

hysteria (2.75 / 4) (#140)
by binford2k on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:26:44 AM EST

who's child like innocense have been ripped from them

So what of the millions of kids who played house with the kid next door?  Did they rip each other's innocence away?  Are they all growing up to be whores and rapists?  Hell, I played house as a kid quite often; are you going to say that I've got a damaged psyche because of it?

What is different about the situation when a couple kids twiddle each other and when an adult twiddles a kid?  Why is one harmful and one isn't?  That's right, you (society) go apeshit about the one and tell the kid that he/she must feel violated.  So who is it again that hurts the kid?

Your argument, while containing a nugget of a point, was just hyperbole because of the hysterical way it was presented.

off topic:  whose, innocence, sickos

[ Parent ]

The difference is... (2.33 / 6) (#208)
by Zombie Schrodingers Cat on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:41:00 PM EST

Niether of the kids playing doctor knows what they're doing. They're both just playing, not really getting sexual gratification.

The child molester does know what he's doing. The child is just playing but the molester is getting off on it. The molester is using the child. The child in her innocence isn't aware that she is being used.

But then the child grows up. She learns about what sex is and then remembers what happened with Uncle Bob a few years ago. She now realises that Uncle Bob wasn't just playing a little game like she originally thought. Uncle Bob was using her like an object for his own sexual gratification.

That girl is never going to be curious about sex. She had sex before she knew what it was. And she can no longer trust anyone because her trust in Uncle Bob allowed him to use her. Uncle Bob took her innocense and her ability to trust.

This is completely different from a couple of kids fooling around. When they learn what sex is they will look back and laugh at the things they did, not knowing how things really worked. Nobody violated anyone's trust, so no psychological damage was done.

[ Parent ]

WTF (2.00 / 2) (#351)
by Zombie Schrodingers Cat on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:22:03 PM EST

so if a child is physically abused then its perfectly ok to sexually abuse her as well? Physical abuse is wrong therefore sexual abuse is ok?

WHAT THE FUCK?


[ Parent ]

Way to dodge that question... n/t (2.00 / 2) (#361)
by nightfire on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:53:23 PM EST



[ Parent ]
dodge what? (3.00 / 2) (#400)
by Zombie Schrodingers Cat on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 08:50:45 AM EST

It was a false dilemma. He's trying to frame it so that I have to choose between being against physical abuse OR being against sexual abuse. Get a clue dude. I'm against both physical abuse AND against sexual abuse.

I'm not going to enter a debate on which is worse because that will just distract us from my point, which is: Molesting children is bad.

If anyone is dodging it is him.

[ Parent ]

Similarly (3.00 / 5) (#33)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:57:46 PM EST

if we vote it down, you can tell yourself we're scared of the entire subject, rather than that we simply didn't like your story as much as this one or this or even this.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
Let the witch hunt begin (2.37 / 8) (#14)
by loteck on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:22:54 PM EST

I'm guessing LJ.
--
"You're in tune to the musical sound of loteck hi-fi, the musical sound that moves right round. Keep on moving ya'll." -Mylakovich
"WHAT AN ETERNAL MOBIUS STRIP OF FELLATIATIC BANALITY THIS IS." -Harry B Otch

you (3.00 / 15) (#16)
by Linux or FreeBSD on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:32:11 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Return of JABS. n (3.00 / 5) (#28)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:50:43 PM EST



---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
No 10-year-old would even consider LJ /nt (2.25 / 4) (#92)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:25:05 PM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
It's LilDebbie. $ (2.83 / 6) (#198)
by Water on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:00:53 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Its Orion Shitstar (2.00 / 2) (#429)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:57:53 AM EST

He said he has a mental illness.
Fits perfectly.

[ Parent ]
It's Egil (2.00 / 2) (#466)
by Obvious Egil Dupe on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:25:03 PM EST



[ Parent ]
There is a serious flaw (2.44 / 9) (#19)
by hamingja on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:40:29 PM EST

in the research study you cited:
"The test was conducted using an errection test aparatus, and slides of naked women, and the next day naked 10 year old girls, were shown to the test subjects.
The authors do not explain the external features of the naked women that were shown to the test subjects. I can easily imagine a selection of women that having been shown naked to the subjects would have reduced their penises to amorphous dead worms.

--
p(3)=0.3405373296... => even in an infinite universe, not everything is possible...
hahaha (2.33 / 3) (#138)
by binford2k on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:11:55 AM EST

even some of the girls I've dated do that to me now.

[ Parent ]
Flaw, huh? (2.50 / 4) (#253)
by Just this guy on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:42:16 PM EST

That might explain why there weren't erections for the older women, but, uh, maybe they just found a bunch of super-hot 10 year olds? Kinda hard to ignore that part.

[ Parent ]
You're wrong. (1.50 / 2) (#307)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:54:40 PM EST

You're wrong.  Re-read the study.

They noted that in over a quarter of the test subjects, they registered errections (as defined by a minimum circumference growth), AND this either met or exceed the previous errection.

Anyway it isn't important.

[ Parent ]

-1, try posting a few diaries first (2.00 / 6) (#25)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:48:06 PM EST

We can't tell if you can write any good pr0n yet.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.

troll or not, I'm curious to know if you would be (2.60 / 5) (#30)
by hamingja on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:53:03 PM EST

comfortable with your ten year old daughter dating a guy in his forties.

--
p(3)=0.3405373296... => even in an infinite universe, not everything is possible...
Yes, with caveats (3.00 / 6) (#36)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:07:37 PM EST

First of all, as an absolute prerequisite, it has to be a relationship that SHE is enjoying, and that SHE wants to continue.

Second of all, if it's "out and open" it has to be in a country where this is tolerated.  I would not risk having my daughter dragged through court, or potentially charged (yes it is illegal to have sex in some states if you are under 14.  Yes, some children have been prosecuted and sent to juvie).

Third, I would only accept it if she was very well educated about the risks, how to mitigate them effectively.

However, I might add that a 10/40 relationship would be a lot more awkward than a 10/20 one, because remembering what it was like at that age, and exercising the extra caution and patience it takes when being with someone inexperienced can be forgotten that far from childhood.

Given all this, would I stand in the way?  No.  I would leave it up to her.

And if she wanted to end it, I would be right there with her to back her up.  It is, after all, her feelings that are important.  Not mine.

[ Parent ]

JFYI (3.00 / 2) (#53)
by Psychopath on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:30:04 PM EST

as far as I know in Austria a relationship between a 10 and a 40 year old person would not be allowed - but in contrast to the USA the 10 year old person would not get any problem (except problem caused by his/her parents;) because s/he is not criminally responsible, as my dictionary calls it. The 40 year old person might get some problems though.
(For details about the legality in Germany, Switzerland and Austria see this page - in German only though, sorry.)
--
The only antidote to mental suffering is physical pain. -- Karl Marx
[ Parent ]
Never have kids, please. [n/t] (2.00 / 2) (#491)
by zephc on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 06:52:56 PM EST



[ Parent ]
I don't know whether to laugh or cry (2.00 / 5) (#32)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 06:57:29 PM EST

It's not a fucking troll, people.

I'm sorry I mentioned the witch-hunt bit.  I meant to defuse one, because I was certain some well-meaning asshat would start accusing various people of being the author.  It backfired.

Anyway, it speaks volumes to me personally that so many people think it is a troll.  That shows how deeply rooted the cultural mindset is, if people can't even contemplate this.

OK, you convinced me it's not a troll (3.00 / 1) (#41)
by hamingja on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:09:36 PM EST

then, I share LilDebbie opinion, with the only difference being that I would use the term incarcerating instead of murdering.
--
p(3)=0.3405373296... => even in an infinite universe, not everything is possible...
[ Parent ]
Sorry.. (2.25 / 4) (#50)
by Psychopath on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:26:13 PM EST

..that I havent read (and commented) this story while it was in edit.
  • Don't put to spaces after a dot. One is enough, two spaces just makes it looking awkward. (like a space on the beginning of a line)
  • And now for the real thing: All these hey, please don't flame me because... and the rusty if you think... topics should (in my opinion) be placed in editorial comments, not in the story itself. think about it: if the story gets accepted it'd be strange to read something like and if it gets accepted
Regards,
P.
--
The only antidote to mental suffering is physical pain. -- Karl Marx
[ Parent ]
Yeah :( (3.00 / 2) (#56)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:30:55 PM EST

It's the first story I've posted, and I wasn't getting any responses in editing so I just sent it to voting.

Anyway I don't think it would have mattered.  It's clearly not something people want to discuss.

Oh well.

[ Parent ]

First story? (none / 1) (#63)
by Psychopath on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:38:09 PM EST

Never submitted anything under your other account(s)?
--
The only antidote to mental suffering is physical pain. -- Karl Marx
[ Parent ]
Nope (2.00 / 2) (#68)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:46:18 PM EST

But, quite a few comments. :)  I also have a diary that some people read, though I don't usually talk about this stuff.

[ Parent ]
I can kick it back to editing if you like n/t (2.00 / 2) (#85)
by janra on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:16:27 PM EST


--
Discuss the art and craft of writing
That's the problem with world domination... Nobody is willing to wait for it anymore, work slowly towards it, drink more and enjoy the ride more.
[ Parent ]
Please do so (3.00 / 6) (#98)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:37:45 PM EST

this is perfect to spread the holiday cheer in the editing queue for days on end.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
Only real intelligent comment was: (1.87 / 8) (#42)
by kitten on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:11:15 PM EST

Q: Kids don't have the mental capacity blah blah blah.
A: Neither do most adults (yes I've had several adult gfs).


Which is true. The argument about sex with minors always comes down to someone griping that kids don't have the mental acumen to deal with the consequences of sex and so forth.

Most of the people who say this either haven't looked around at the adult population, or are one of the adults who are too stupid to deal with things (and consequently don't realize it).

We are talking about people who don't understand that things need to be plugged in to work. That Iraq did not attaack the World Trade Center. People who cannot master their native language and such concepts as "punctuation" and "capitalization". People who, when faced with something they're unsure of, would rather scream for help than even attempt to figure it out for themselves. People who would rather believe what they're told to believe than to think for themselves. People who become angry and fearful when they encounter something that they don't approve of.

Stupid people. You think they can handle sex?

On a more direct level, look at all the people with STDs, or who are pregnant and cannot financially care for the child, or who use sex as a weapon, or as a replacement for emotional bonding. These people -- adults -- are no more capable, mentally speaking, of handling the "consequences" of sex.

One wonders where the line is drawn. Where someone gets off saying that a 14 year old is "incapable of understanding" sex but the fucking moron 26 year old in your accounting department, the one who still acts like he's in high school, he's perfectly capable of it.


mirrorshades radio - darkwave, synthpop, industrial, futurepop.
An interesting point (3.00 / 4) (#95)
by 1419 on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:34:45 PM EST


Sex ed. Maybe that's what K5 needs?!

[ Parent ]
I doubt it (3.00 / 4) (#105)
by kitten on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 09:04:17 PM EST

I don't think people can be educated. I have grave doubts as to the classification of our species as "intelligent" at all.

We have formal education for just about every other topic, and most people have gone through years and years of this, and are still blithering idiots. What makes you think trying to teach them about this will turn out any different?
mirrorshades radio - darkwave, synthpop, industrial, futurepop.
[ Parent ]
Well I think I am something of an optimist ~/nt (3.00 / 4) (#106)
by 1419 on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 09:05:51 PM EST



[ Parent ]
It's work in a way (2.20 / 5) (#125)
by godix on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:25:59 PM EST

I can think of no better way to make sure children have no interest in sex than if we taught it the same way we teach children literature, science, etc. People don't stumble into the fact school subjects can be fun until decades after they're out of school, if they ever stumble into that fact at all. So by all means promote sex ed, it'll reduce 10 year olds thinking they should fuck although not for the reasons most sex ed endorsers usually claim.


- An egotist is someone who thinks they're almost as good as I am.
[ Parent ]
That reminds me of a similar story (2.50 / 6) (#127)
by 1419 on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:29:46 PM EST

which had the exact same punch line. I won't go into details, but I think you are right. Sex Ed in American high schools was just a big fuckin' dissected vagina, microscopic images and vague rhetoric designed to offend no one.

Sex Ed....

[ Parent ]

really? (3.00 / 3) (#129)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:39:42 PM EST

you didn't get to put condoms on wooden penises?  

I quite liked sex ed.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Not that I recall. ~/nt (2.25 / 4) (#131)
by 1419 on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:52:07 PM EST



[ Parent ]
no (2.72 / 11) (#136)
by binford2k on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:05:27 AM EST

we had to feel rubber balls in a rubber scrotum for nut cancer.

[ Parent ]
yikes (2.50 / 4) (#137)
by livus on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:08:50 AM EST

I missed our cancer-feeling session and had to figure it out later. We didn't get it until age 16 though, whereas the free condoms and stuff came a few years earlier (when I was still at a mixed gender school, heh).

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
heh. True, might stop them thinking it was cool (2.00 / 3) (#128)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:32:55 PM EST

I'm thinking of the Spoiled Whore episode of South Park here.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
Gotta cut 'em off at some point (3.00 / 3) (#190)
by LilDebbie on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 01:06:28 PM EST

If you're going to give them the right to vote at least.

Hmm...that gives me an idea. Setup a process by which adults can give up their suffrage in exchange for some sort of protected status.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]

there will always be pedophiles (1.88 / 9) (#46)
by circletimessquare on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:15:41 PM EST

always were pedophiles, always will be pedophiles. it's just a natural variation of human sexuality. like homosexuality

however, homosexuality occurs between consenting adults. this makes it acceptable

meanwhile, pedophilia invovles a child that is incapable of informed consent

dear author:

INFORMED

CONSENT

those two words burn away every single argument you have made, or could make. there is no way for you to get beyond that concept

therefore, pedophilia can never ever be accepted

ever


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

As proof you are incorrect (1.50 / 2) (#51)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:26:19 PM EST

It only takes one counterexample to prove you wrong.  I submit that my relationships (both as a child and as an adult) were consentual.

Pedophilia does NOT involve a child that is incapable of informed consent.

Pedophilia is the emotional and sexual attraction to prepubescent kids.

Whether a person is or is not capable of giving consent is not for you to decide.

[ Parent ]

Of course... (2.25 / 4) (#58)
by imexius on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:32:46 PM EST

Of course! It is for the pedophile to decide.

[ Parent ]
Sort of (2.00 / 3) (#65)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:39:22 PM EST

You're half right.  It is for the two people to decide.  NO ONE ELSE.  What the hell?

"Do you wanna do it?"

"Hells ya!"

Consent.

"Do you wanna do it?"

"Noo.... I shouldn't."

Nonconsent.

By the way, I should add that my fiance CAME ON TO ME.  How is that lacking consent?  I don't understand.

[ Parent ]

INFORMED consent you asswipe nt (2.40 / 5) (#89)
by circletimessquare on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:19:38 PM EST



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
Doesn't mean a thing. (none / 1) (#434)
by HollyHopDrive on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:24:34 PM EST

When I was ten years old I wore a string bikini and had toy lipstick that came with my dress-up head. Didn't mean I was coming on to anyone. Meant I was experimenting with what I was starting to discover, and whether or not any grown men thought I was coming on to them was irrelevant. They were still supposed to back off for a few more years.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

dear fucktard (1.50 / 2) (#88)
by circletimessquare on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:19:08 PM EST

below a certain age, informed consent is a given

give it up


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

In your opinion (none / 1) (#431)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:10:31 PM EST

what age would that be?

I'd say, it depends on the person.

Some ppl are ready at 17-18, some at 13-14.

[ Parent ]

The difficulty of rules (2.72 / 11) (#141)
by Coryoth on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:36:19 AM EST

There are some 10 year olds who are, I'm sure, entirely capable of drinming alcohol responsibly and who would be fine. There are also, and for this there is plenty of evidence, people of legal drinking age who really can't drink responsibly, and really shouldn't be drinming at all. When someone wants to buy alcohol, however, doing a careful and complete study to determine if this particular individual is, in fact, mature and responsible enough to be given alchol, just isn't feasible. The reality is that doing careful case by case analysis isn't an option. So instead we pick an age as a cutoff that tries to be a good average: most people over the given age should be responsible enough, and there shouldn't be a large percentage of people younger than the given age who also would be but are barred. It's a pragmatic solution, and yes, some people get burned by it (they are responsible enough to drink, but aren't over the magic age), and it doesn't work perfectly for everyone; but on balance it does a good job by and large given the practicalities involved.

Judging whether a child is mature enough to make informed decisions about sex is also rather complex. Combine that with the power differential in a relationship where one individual is much older, and things get even more tricky. An older person holds all the cards, has all the information, and can have a significant impact on the developing ideas and opinions of someone much younger - determining how much of their consent has been coerced is very hard. And the kicker is that once its happened, there's no going back - if any damage is done, then it can't be undone. Gien that it is unrealistic to determine whether a child is mature enough to properly consent to sex on a case by case basis. The pragmatic solution is to pick an age as a cutoff that tries to be a good average: most people over the age ought to be mature enough, and those younger should, on average, be unlikely to be mature enough for there not to be lingering questions of consent or coercion.

This is how legal systems work: they are pragmatic. They pick quasi-arbitrary ages (why 18 years old before you can vote? Why not 17 and 3/4? Why not 18.5? etc.) as a best guess that should work on average. Case by case evaluation is, quite simply, infeasible. The result is that we have laws regarding when a child can consent to sex. Yes, some children are younger but are mature enough, and some are older, and probably aren't.  We can't evaluate each child however, and leaving the decision up to an individual with a vested interest (they want to have sex with the child) is hardly a solution. It's not perfect, anymore than drinking age, or voting age, or when you are considered old enough to own firearms, or any other cutoff age, but it is a pragmatic and practical approach that has been, by and large, honed over the years to provide the best results.

Arguing about individuals just isn't sufficient.

[ Parent ]

I agree to some extent (3.00 / 3) (#151)
by Coryoth on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 02:54:02 AM EST

I agree that there is a demonization of paedophilia that goes beyond what is reasonable - but that's just the same "think of the children!" type reaction that has demonized all manner of other things such as various drugs, sex in general,  and so on, beyond what is reasonable.

On the other hand, the reason so many people will condemn a 45 year old having sex with a 14 year old is that, without knowing all manner of detail, it is simply too hard to tell whether it really was entirely consensual with no hint of coercion. In a relationship like that, with one player young, relatively uninformed, and impressionable, and the other someone the child undoubtedly looks up to to some extent, and clearly desiring to persuade the child to have sex, it is quite possible for the child to be convinced to to consent  through subtle coercion in a way that would be almost undetectable without very very careful analysis. That is to say, in that situation it would be very hard to demonstrate conclusively that informed consent was given without any undue coercion. Given that, while there are many 14 year olds who might be able to consent in an informed manner without coercion, the majority, realistically, would not, the natural leaning, barring evidence to the contrary, is to assume consent was coerced. With a natural assumption of coercion and no way to clearly demonstrate otherwise... well, that's why people view it badly.

For comparison consider a 14 year old boy having sex wit a 14 year old girl. In that case there isn't the same power imbalance, and coercion is a lot less likely (the boy is in, comparatively, no position to coerce to anywhere near the same degree). The natural assumption then tends to e one of consent. And indeed you'll find, in general, people are a lot more tolerant of such things.

The reality is that due to the power imbalance in knowledge, and in impessionability, between young children and adults, the potential for coerced consent is simply too high. You have to admit that, knowing nothing else about the case, there is, on spec, the appearance of impropriety. With that stain so hard to clean the results are obvious.

[ Parent ]

It differs (none / 1) (#481)
by Pseudonym on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 06:03:38 PM EST

In many countries, the consent is variable and based on age difference.

In my state, for example, the "age of consent" is 16. So a 16 year old can legally have sex with anyone who is 16 or older (provided there isn't an "in the care of" relationship, such as one party being a teacher). But a 10 year old can legally have sex with someone no more than two years older than they are.

We can argue about the details, but IMO this kind of principle makes a lot more sense than an arbitrary cutoff date.


sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
[ Parent ]
How can you consent to sex (2.33 / 6) (#211)
by Zombie Schrodingers Cat on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:05:06 PM EST

before you've learned what sex is?

A 10 year old may have some vague notions of what sex is, but doesn't fully understand it.

[ Parent ]

Your kids must be naive as hell. (1.50 / 2) (#432)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:11:22 PM EST



[ Parent ]
what makes you think it's "information"? (2.16 / 6) (#60)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:35:55 PM EST

It's actually the ability to be informed.

The more neuroscientists and others learn about childhood brain development the more data we have to support this (even though it's always been obvious to the casual observer).

THIS  is a good example.  

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

wtf. No. (2.00 / 5) (#67)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:44:50 PM EST

I'm defining the "informed" aspect of "informed consent".

The issue isn't whether someone can technically say the words "yes" and "no" but whether they can fully judge the implications of such a thing.

Removing the word "informed" from the argument is empty sophistry.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

yeah I realised after posting (2.00 / 3) (#75)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:56:28 PM EST

My reply is  here.

To be quite honest I agree with Kitten that it's not 100% for adults either. But it's ludicrous to expect people who believe in Santa Claus and idolise Barbie to make informed decisions about whether to engage in activity that will, for example, increase their chances of cervical cancer. And this is why we have laws protecting them from such things, from tobacco, and from credit card debt.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Ice hockey (2.50 / 2) (#603)
by nightfire on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 12:36:28 PM EST

Riding a bicycle, rock climbing, sunbathing, riding dirt bikes, chemistry labs, etc., all carry the risk of permanent injury or death.

This in and of itself is not sufficient reason for forbidding something.

There are other good reasons to do so, but risk isn't really one of them, IMO.

[ Parent ]

sorry (1.00 / 3) (#73)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:50:58 PM EST

re-reading this I think I see what you're saying, you mean am I saying there's a greater probability that an adult has the capacity for informed consent.

Yes. Now if your argument is about to go where I think it is, I should in all fairness point out that I have strong utilitarian leanings.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Excellent point (1.50 / 4) (#64)
by hamingja on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:39:06 PM EST


--
p(3)=0.3405373296... => even in an infinite universe, not everything is possible...
[ Parent ]
I've always thought (1.57 / 7) (#72)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:49:25 PM EST

it was a great argument for denying women the right to vote, too.  I've heard they lack the ability to be informed, and it's crazy cuckoos who have been arguing otherwise.

We know that a women's brain can't process math and science as well as men's brains, and as math and science are the foundation of all that is around us, an deficiency is bound to cause problems.  Right?

[ Parent ]

You're changing the subject, answer the q /nt (1.66 / 3) (#76)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:59:13 PM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
I think it's witless banter (2.00 / 2) (#87)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:18:21 PM EST

As I know from personal experience that the ability to "be informed" is only loosely related to age (I think it takes a nose dive around 16 onwards), I don't understand what the point is.

It's like most people think they're idiots.  Just like all people, some are.  Some are not.  Blanket statements are not fair.

[ Parent ]

there are guys who can speed (1.00 / 1) (#613)
by circletimessquare on Fri Dec 22, 2006 at 03:01:32 AM EST

90 mph, every day, for years, and never crash

however, most of us can't do that, so we have a speed limit

so when the police pull over mr. i-never-crash, does he get off scott free?

no. the law is the law. 60 mph. seems arbitrary? some people can handle 70 mph? others can't handle more than 50 mph?

doesn't fucking matter. the speed limit is what it is: a "blanket statement" as you say

doesn't seem fair?

it doesn't seem fair to the dead family in the car who you wiped out on either

she's 13 and says she can handle it? gee, kids never front their level amturiy. and she actually can't. oh well, you've fucked with the emotions of a child inappropriately. guess what: you're a criminal. you deserve to go to jail. jus tlike the chronic speeder

sorry that "doesn't seem fair" asshole

the game you are playing: praying on the sexually immature is a million miles beyond "not fair"

you lose asshole


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

Although I know that it probably wasn't meant (none / 0) (#675)
by kaens on Tue Jan 30, 2007 at 10:22:34 PM EST

to, your post seems to imply that there are no laws that are unjust. That is certainly not the case. Following that logic - that of never questioning those in power over you - leads people to nasty, nasty situations. Really.


--I surface, and I stagnate.
[ Parent ]
That old chestnut (1.66 / 6) (#80)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:05:47 PM EST

the difference being that women, blacks etc aren't in the process of becoming adult men who will therefore achieve these same rights in the future.

I can't help thinking that if you were really a serious practicing pedo, not only would you know how to spell the associated jargon, but you would be a lot more facile in the common arguments about paedophilia.

If you were, you'd have probably written a better article, and wouldn't feel the need to lie to us about random stuf like 4chan.

On this note, I'm off to post some xmas cards. Enjoy your symptom.


---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Nice Diversion (3.00 / 2) (#544)
by hatshepsut on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 12:23:16 PM EST

Men and women may think differently, but they have the same information available to them, and ultimately have previous experiences to fall back on when making decisions about new things. Children do not have that buffer, and do think very differently than adults (they are more naive, are more likely to believe whatever they are told by a trusted person, and generally more likely to trust people - some of which I envy, but certainly not all).

I am not a rabid "think of the children" type (I hope, at any rate), but I cannot get by the fact that the age differential you are talking about (10 years or more) doesn't feel like a fair or equal "relationship". There is a huge difference between two young people experimenting and learning together (playing house/doctor/what-have-you), and an adult obtaining something they know they want from a young person who quite likely DOESN'T know what they want.

Most children of the age you discussed (10 or 11) are sexually naive. They know some of the mechanics (unless their parents are "ignorance will keep them safe" types), but they are not physically mature, they are not emotionally mature, and they tend to have a limited view of the longer-term consequences of their actions. The argument "if society didn't tell these kids how they had been damaged, they wouldn't be damaged" doesn't fly with me.

Power imbalance is the real problem. Whether it is the boss doing one of the employees, an abusive spouse, or using age and/or experience to get sexual gratification from someone who doesn't understand what sex is, what the down-sides can be (STD's, pregnancy, cervical cancer), or what a loving sexual relationship between two equals can be.

There are so many other things I can think of to discuss (like the teacher I had many years ago who had a thing for 11-13 year old girls...while I am sure he never felt he was doing anything wrong, he always seemed to pick out" those girls who were most vulnerable - those whose parents were least likely to notice what was happening. Funny that.). I will stop, however, before I decend into the sort of vitriolic rant you say you are trying to avoid.

[ Parent ]

if you are ignorant enough to ask that question (1.66 / 3) (#90)
by circletimessquare on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:20:53 PM EST

no answer i could possible provide would be able to enlighten you


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
Not necessarily true. (3.00 / 3) (#290)
by 1419 on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:24:24 PM EST

Although I don't particularly advocate it, there have been promising studies in reconditioning human sexuality. It is a very controversial area.

For example christian gay men who "recant" their homosexuality and sex-offenders.

Some possibly relevant studies might include:

Jorge R. Reyes, Timothy R. Vollmer, Kimberly N. Sloman, Astrid Hall, Robert Reed, Greg Jansen, Sam Carr, Kevin Jackson, & Michael Stoutimore. Assessment of deviant arousal in adult male sex offenders with developmental disabilities (2006).  Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,   39, 173-188.

Nordyke, N. S., Baer, D. M., Etzel, B. C., & LeBlanc, J. M. (1977). Implications of the stereotyping and modification of sex role.  Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,  10, 553-557.

Rekers, G. A., & Lovaas, O. I. (1974). Behavioral treatment of deviant sex-role behaviors in a male child.  Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,  7, 173-190.

and so on.

[ Parent ]

I tend to wonder if massive 'bad trip' doses (3.00 / 1) (#344)
by Brick Wall on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:57:17 PM EST

of psychedelics can do quite a bit of good for all sorts of mental problems (ime), but especially with things like this...

Just induce total personality/mind dissolution and force the individual to confront everything about themselves and then rebuild and work through it all.

Harrowing, terrifying work, best done in absolute darkness, completely alone, but in the end, rewarding (for whatever is left (or is built) of the person that manages to survive), to be sure!
---
Some people say Beer is unnecessary, too. I don't believe either of them. - minerboy
[ Parent ]

it's nature, not nurture (2.00 / 2) (#375)
by circletimessquare on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:30:47 AM EST

you can't fix pedophilia, or homosexuality

it is what it is

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

This does run contrary (1.66 / 3) (#376)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:32:58 AM EST

to what a lot of people are saying here.

Most people seem to think that it's a perpetuating cycle.  Abusers abuse, etc.

You think otherwise?

[ Parent ]

well let's put it this way (2.00 / 2) (#379)
by circletimessquare on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:05:20 AM EST

some certainly could be nurture

but if it is nurture and not nature, once the train has left the station, it ain't coming back

psychosexuality is not pretty hard to unwire, it's impossible

it's like getting someone to unlearn english and act like a native japanese speaker at age 25

aint' going to happen, ever

those nerve bundles are wired hard shut on the topic


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

Psychosexuality (1.75 / 4) (#381)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:13:11 AM EST

That's a new one.

Are gays psychosexual?  What about chicks who take it up the ass?

lol

[ Parent ]

you're a fucking moron nt (1.50 / 2) (#385)
by circletimessquare on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:49:33 AM EST



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
Well put. n/t (1.33 / 3) (#388)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:59:07 AM EST



[ Parent ]
Needs more images and links. nt (2.00 / 8) (#59)
by onealone on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:33:02 PM EST



Age or Power? (2.25 / 4) (#74)
by localroger on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:51:57 PM EST

I have seen several analyses that suggest some pedophiles are more motivated by power issues (being the "adult" and therefore guiding / in-charge partner) than the actual youthfulness of their partners. I am curious as to how you see this, and whether there is a dominance/submission element in your relationships with adult women.

I am become Death, Destroyer of Worlds -- J. Robert Oppenheimer
Interesting question (1.50 / 4) (#78)
by floridasun on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 07:59:44 PM EST

I can only speak for myself.

I have always found domination and submission to be a turn-off.  I haven't seen any studies that suggest it's a common pursuit for pedophiles, but I haven't really thought about it.

I will say that, as I mentioned in the story, I don't treat young people differently than I treat people my own age (within reason).  I mean obviously I don't try to talk politics with a 5 year old.

But I don't know.  I don't feel that there has been anything other than respect in my relationships (both as a child and adult), and my fiance probably has more control over what we do than I do.  :)

[ Parent ]

innocence (2.50 / 2) (#134)
by binford2k on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:00:46 AM EST

How about attraction to innocence?

[ Parent ]
Yep :) (2.00 / 3) (#310)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:02:13 PM EST

That's definitely part of it.

So many people my age (my fiance excluded :D) have been brainwashed by society to believe that you have to fit into a certain mould, justified or not.  They become jaded, conceited and ambivalent about things that don't make sense.  "That's just the way it is and there's nothing I can do about it."

They find it easier to deal with injusticies when they see them.

Young people have a harder time with that.  Anyway they don't usually try to sugar coat their interpretations of things for political correctness and I find that beautiful.

Less crushed by the weight of the world, I guess.

[ Parent ]

hmm (none / 0) (#394)
by binford2k on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:36:02 AM EST

putting it that way, I can almost understand the attraction, but I still think it's wrong to act on that.

[ Parent ]
Re: Age or Power (2.50 / 4) (#148)
by student on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 01:17:52 AM EST

I've observed that usually child abuse and rape are associated with power in "analyses,"  not paedophelia.

いいい
Simon's Rock College of Bard, a college for younger scholars.
[ Parent ]
+1FP. (2.46 / 15) (#82)
by creature on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:11:16 PM EST

I don't know if this is true or not; I don't much care. But there is a slim, slim chance that this gets posted and someoen will get on their high horse, start foaming at the mouth, and start posting some ill-written tripe in response. And money can't buy that kind of entertainment - you have to make it happen.

I'll play along like this isn't a troll (2.88 / 17) (#86)
by godix on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:17:07 PM EST

I've known five women who were in sexual relationships when they were under 14 and the man was over 20. Of those four of them were willing. I'll discount the fifth for purposes of this discussion since rape obviously isn't what you're talking about. Out of those four girls all four have turned out to be sluts as adults. I don't mean 'I don't like them and think they sleep around a little too much' type slut. I mean 'each of them sleeps with at least three different men a week, usually within an hour or two of meeting them and none of them has had less than 50 partners in their life" type slut. You know, the type of slut that when talking to her it's obvious within a few minutes she has major issues about sex. All four of them also deeply regret getting involved with a much older man at such a young age. I don't know any females who were in a sexual relationship very young who don't regret it or aren't mentally fucked to some degree because of it. I realize there isn't a magic line you can draw and say 'above this age is a reasonable healthy adult capable of loving relationships and below this age is an older man mentally scarring children' but the fact is there is a difference between a 12 year old and a 20 year old and praying on the 12 year old, no matter how willing she may appear at the time, directly harms her.

I realize this is circumstancial evidence but then again, so is most of your article.


- An egotist is someone who thinks they're almost as good as I am.

It is obvious from Mr floridasun's comments (2.50 / 6) (#94)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:33:30 PM EST

that he would probably blame the society for these women's woes. This means that the society has demonized pedophilia to the point that they have been turned into rape victims who are implicitly blamed for their predicament - just like the rape victim who dresses in a short skirt, gets drunk and flirts with all men in a bar.

Whether this is a valid argument is questionable. But it is hardly a spurious one as its probably impossible to distinguish between harm done by societal victimization and the sexual partner.

So, the bottom line is that it appears to my very limited knowledge of the subject - which is mostly from the news stories the story submitter so loathes - that pre-pubescent people do get fucked up in the head. Whether this is because of the sex, the pedophile or due to other factors is another matter altogether. But it is also apparent that many (most?) pedophile victimes do get fucked up in the head so pedophilia should be kept criminalized or at least discouraged.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
One thing to keep in mind (2.60 / 5) (#104)
by godix on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:59:03 PM EST

This type of thing generally isn't spread far and wide. When they're children it's usually hushed up so no one knows the name of the kid involved, in the US there are laws flat out requiring this in fact. As adults woman with a past like this generally don't talk about it much. In most of my examples it took years of knowing them or being friends before they ever told me about their childhood relationship. The only one I knew about when I met her is because I knew the guy and introduced me to her while he was dating her so of course when I ran into her years later I knew her past.

Anyway, the point is while society does tend to have a 'she had it coming' aspect to it most of society didn't know these women were ever in that situation. Also, in the case of minor children, there's a strong element of thinking children are innocent so they couldn't have been asking for it. The she had it coming thought is generally reserved for adults, or at least teens above 15 or 16 years old. So even if society had known about these women it's doubtful they would have been the ones blamed. So personally I doubt societal victimization is the womens major problem here. Regardless, as you mention, girls get hurt by pedophilia even if they're willing participants and that's enough reason to keep it illegal for me.


- An egotist is someone who thinks they're almost as good as I am.
[ Parent ]

You are not getting me (2.85 / 7) (#109)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 09:17:25 PM EST

it doesn't matter whether people know someone is a victim of a rapist or a pedophile. Just the fact that people and the society treats rape and pedophile victims as damaged goods, as something the victims were at least partly to blame is enough to traumatize many such victims in and of itself. There need not to be any direct victimization, as indirect can be just as bad.

And don't you fucking dare make pedophilia - or rape - something only women can be subjected to.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
Ah, got ya now (3.00 / 4) (#111)
by godix on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 09:29:43 PM EST

Sorry, I thought you meant people directly and personally blaming them. Shoulda realized you were talking broad general vibes that society gives out.

I made it all about women because the people I know where in this situation were all women and those were my circumstantial evidence. I'm quite sure males can and do get sexually fucked over as kids, I just don't personally know any (that have confided in me about it at least).


- An egotist is someone who thinks they're almost as good as I am.
[ Parent ]

I'd say men who are victims of rape (3.00 / 7) (#116)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:23:29 PM EST

and child abuse are even more victimized (indirectly) by the society as they have even less chance of getting sympathy than women do. I'm sure there are still people who perpetuate the myth that men can't be raped.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
may have something to do with the abusers (2.75 / 4) (#108)
by oilmoat on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 09:16:58 PM EST

being in positions of authority (stepfathers, childcare staff or just because they're older), resulting in a distorted importance of sex as a valuation metric. And on the other hand, extreme anorexics (some anorexics are in it to reject their body not to beautify it) may have higher correlation with rape?
I have IBPND. (I believe in people, not disorders.)
[ Parent ]
Sorry (2.20 / 5) (#113)
by godix on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 09:55:58 PM EST

I didn't realize there was a rational argument anywhere in this article or it's responses. This is K5, why would anyone expect rational arguments?


- An egotist is someone who thinks they're almost as good as I am.
[ Parent ]
His article draws a similar conclusion (2.60 / 5) (#124)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:25:42 PM EST

insofar as his the neighbour's daughter is now engaged to a pedophile. at 19 and "shares" his "condition". How's that for a rosy future.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
my wife (2.57 / 7) (#133)
by binford2k on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:59:39 PM EST

The woman I married had her first sexual experience in this manner, and yes, she turned out to be the kind of person you describe.  She's no longer my wife.  In her case, however, I think that the cause was just as much her mother (who whored around something fierce) as the underage sexual experience.

Oh, the beauty of hindsight.

[ Parent ]

Odd. (2.00 / 4) (#300)
by student on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:41:09 PM EST

I know a girl who has responded in the opposite way to her mother's promiscuity, after having suffered the consequences - growing up in a household with too many children and only one "adult."

いいい
Simon's Rock College of Bard, a college for younger scholars.
[ Parent ]
Girls growing into adult sluts (1.80 / 5) (#173)
by Comrade Wonderful on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:01:09 AM EST

later is a symptom of home life problems.  Guaranteed.

[ Parent ]
Well (2.00 / 3) (#311)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:04:44 PM EST

I guess it sucks to be you.  What you're talking about is unrelated to my/our situation.

Good luck.

[ Parent ]

I'd like to meet this kind of woman (1.50 / 1) (#623)
by Big Sexxy Joe on Tue Dec 26, 2006 at 04:37:44 PM EST

Any advice?

I'm like Jesus, only better.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free grassroots news hour
[ Parent ]
What is the most realistic depiction of pedophilia (3.00 / 3) (#97)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:35:09 PM EST

in modern fiction - movies or books? And by most realistic I don't mean most graphic.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


Good question (3.00 / 3) (#166)
by ljazbec on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:24:28 AM EST

the movie 'Happiness' had a pedophile in it. It shows him as 'just a human being' while he also abuses kids. This isn't the kind of person who sleeps with a kid cause the kid says 'yeah, sure', it's the kind of person who drugs the kid.

But he's still portrayed as a human being rather than 'OMG MONSTARR!'. I mean, people like that should be in jail, but not demonized - they are people and people do horrible things.

[ Parent ]

I don't watch many movies or TV (1.66 / 3) (#312)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:07:22 PM EST

but there are a couple I've seen (some good some bad):

Maledolescenza
Lolita
David Hamilton's stuff
Leon

Some/most of these films are illegal in the US though so be careful.

[ Parent ]

Not the answer I was looking for (2.33 / 3) (#320)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:34:05 PM EST

There are plenty of flicks out there which portray pedophilia. I was looking for one you think is most realistic. And you saying some of those are good, some bad doesn't really answer that.

Besides, Leon was more of a movie about a little girl who'd like to fuck an old guy, not about an old guy who'd like to fuck a little girl - at least I didn't get that vibe from him as he appeared to be at least reticent about even being around her.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
Er.. (1.33 / 3) (#333)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:26:12 PM EST

There are plenty of flicks out there which portray pedophilia. I was looking for one you think is most realistic. And you saying some of those are good, some bad doesn't really answer that.

Then I'm sorry, I don't know.

Besides, Leon was more of a movie about a little girl who'd like to fuck an old guy, not about an old guy who'd like to fuck a little girl - at least I didn't get that vibe from him as he appeared to be at least reticent about even being around her.

This is an accurate portrayal, and how many of these relationships start.  It turns out that he wasn't interested, but for some people, it turns out they are.

[ Parent ]

So you're saying that kids seduce adults to (2.00 / 3) (#368)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:06:18 AM EST

have sweaty spidermonkeysex with them?

Before that comment I was giving you the benefit of the doubt but you just outed yourself as just as delusionally depraved as the media portrays your kind. I'm glad you reinforced my worldview and my commitment to [redacted] your kind if I ever encounter one.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
What is the best way to avoid my future children (2.71 / 7) (#99)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:41:53 PM EST

getting molested by your kind?

And I don't mean this in a disrespectful way. I just don't want to end up with my children being traumatized, and me in jail for chopping some of your brethren to pieces and feeding them to reindeer. So an honest answer to this question benefits both me and your kind.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


Sir, I must object!! (2.20 / 5) (#100)
by Stjck on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:47:05 PM EST

Information like that could mean the end of lesbians and strippers.

[ Parent ]
You want your daughter to be a lesbian stripper? (2.00 / 2) (#102)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:51:33 PM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
he wants your daughter to (3.00 / 9) (#115)
by dongs on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:22:39 PM EST



[ Parent ]
No, mine too (2.87 / 8) (#117)
by Stjck on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:26:53 PM EST

I can steal cash from her knickers when she's munching rug.

[ Parent ]
HIREZ OR STFU /nt (2.66 / 3) (#118)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:30:10 PM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
I feel like this thread really dissolved well (2.50 / 4) (#169)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:50:02 AM EST


----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

Someone who says things like (2.00 / 3) (#174)
by Comrade Wonderful on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:03:21 AM EST

"HIREZ OR STFU" isn't going to be beating up on men anytime soon.

[ Parent ]
nah, they're unstoppable. n (3.00 / 1) (#130)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:40:26 PM EST



---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
HOWTO (2.75 / 8) (#179)
by Sgt York on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:50:00 AM EST

I've done a lot of volunteer work with kids from 10-18, many of them in wide array of pretty bad circumstances. There are a few common themes, and the most common is distant parents. Not even distant, really; maybe inattentive is a better word. It's possible to be casually warm with your kids, if that makes any sense. And that's just as bad.

It's not just that the parents are uninvolved and therefore don't see what's happening. That is a factor, but not really that big of one. Any parent that thinks they know everything about their kids is a fool. For those of you that think you do know, I've met a dozen people just like you; "I'm my kids' best friend! They tell me everything!" No, they don't. They tell me a helluva a lot more than they tell you, and they don't tell me everything, either.

OK, back on topic...Like I was saying, it's not that the parents are too uninvolved to see, it's more that the parents are leaving a need unadressed. Kids need a lot of things, and one of them is attention. And I don't mean just listening to them when they want to talk. I mean grabbing and dragging them off to a baseball game. Irritate them with your pleas for their attention. It's better than the other way around. At least they'll always know you're there and want to see them; and it's really the desire that's more important. Even if you don't get to spend the time with them that you want to or should, just expressing the genuine desire to be with them is what is necessary. It's better to genuinely express the desire to go to your kid's basketball game and not be able to than to go and be on the phone or checking your watch the whole time.

You have to give them attention, that desire to be with them is the best evidence they have that they are loved. If you don't give it to them, someone else will, and there are all kinds lined up to give them the attention they need, crave, and seek. You'd just better hope they find somebody like me, and not somebody like floridasun. I'll shove them back at you and pester you to pay attention to your kid. Others are more than happy to rip them away from you.

There is a reason for everything. Sometimes, that reason just sucks.
[ Parent ]

My answer (3.00 / 3) (#315)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:13:50 PM EST

comes in two parts.

Firstly though, "my kind" don't molest people.

I presume you mean "what can I do to ensure my future children don't take an interest in sex with people who are older than them."

I don't know.  But I do know some things that would be counterproductive:

  • Taking them to church and indoctrinating them to hate themselves
  • Shaming them (you're ugly, don't masturbate, sex is evil)
  • Physically abusing them

Your best bet is to encourage them to seek relationships with peers their own age.  If they're not afraid of relationships they'll be in a better position to judge whether or not what they're getting into is positive or negative.

Talk to them about sex and what they're going through.  If you expect to be able to stand in the way of a relationship they're forming with someone you disapprove of, you're going to need to know how they feel and what they think.

The second part of my answer is directed towards staying out of jail.  If you don't want to end up in jail, don't kill people.  EOD.

[ Parent ]

Ok, fair enough (3.00 / 2) (#323)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:45:07 PM EST

How would you advise to protect from people who do molest children? I'm aware that most of those cases are done by acquaintances.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
The same way (3.00 / 4) (#336)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:30:35 PM EST

shrug

The same way you protect yourself from rapists.

Teach them to yell.  Teach them to tell.

Demystify and discuss sex with them, so that they know what is acceptable, what isn't.  Tell them they're allowed to say no, and they're allowed to say yes.  Tell them to be careful, and that you love them, and no matter what happens, you will be there for them.

This toolset should help them ward off a potential attacker.

As a bonus it would also work well for dealing with drugs, alcohol, etc.

[ Parent ]

Paedophiles != child predators (2.90 / 11) (#101)
by it certainly is on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:50:29 PM EST

Paedophiles have fucked-up fantasies. As such, they should share the same fate as furries, lactophiles, watersports fans, leather fans, coprophiliacs, agalmatophiliacs and other fucked-up pervs - to be laughed at should they be found out, but otherwise to be left alone and free to think what they like, provided they do not engage in non-consensual acts or try anything on with children.

Most paedophiles realise that acting out their fantasies would irreparably damage a child's psychological development and cause grevious psychosexual trauma, amongst other things. So they responsibly choose not to act out their fetish in real life. And that just suits me fine.

Nobody cares about these "aren't fucking children" paedophiles. People only care about the paedophiles who are evil, selfish and immoral enough to actually try grooming or molesting children. Apparantly, it's not enough that we put these people in jail. They are somehow worse than murders and rapists put together. If you looked at it rationally, murder is still worse than molesting children, and to compare molestation and rape depends entirely on the details of the case. It's only because that there's an entirely irrational moral panic about paedophiles that they're seen as infinitely worse.

(In case anyone thinks thinks I'm "defending" paedophiles - I'm not. And, in case you're thinking it, no I'm not a paedophile. I'm a breasts-loving man myself, and I can't imagine why anyone would be sexually attracted to someone with no secondary sexual characteristics. But that's for them and their psychiatrist to work out.)

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.

Did you read the article? (2.75 / 4) (#103)
by nightfire on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 08:56:16 PM EST

I dunno if you read the article, but he's claiming that he's marrying some chick he's been doing since she was 10.

It's too bad we can't get her on the line.  It would be interesting to hear what she has to say.  Heh.

[ Parent ]

I always read the comments first. (2.85 / 7) (#175)
by it certainly is on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:05:13 AM EST

But the reason for the comment is that There seemed to be a lot of people in the comments confusing paedophillia with child predators, molestors and rapists. Sure, the guy in the story appears to be all four, but people should really be precise in their distinction.

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.
[ Parent ]

Do you want the story retitled to child predator? (2.33 / 3) (#123)
by livus on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:23:55 PM EST

Not only does the author describe getting children to "drop their guard" but he also says that his fiance, who he molested as a child and who he describes as "one of them", now "shares" his condition.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
meh (2.20 / 5) (#132)
by binford2k on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:55:21 PM EST

the author describe getting children to "drop their guard"

Surely you've got a better complaint than grasping at straws like this.  Getting people to "drop their guard" applies any time new acquaintances are made, male, female, young, old.

[ Parent ]

context is everything dude (2.60 / 5) (#135)
by livus on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:05:10 AM EST

if the author was non-practicing then surely that would have been stated up front.

What could he possibly have to gain by being coy about it?

I have numerous complaints, all of which I have listed here already.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

missed the point (2.25 / 4) (#142)
by binford2k on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:37:57 AM EST

He's not being coy about anything.  He said that it takes a while for them to drop their guard, just the way I might tell you about a girl I was interested in by saying, "yeah, I tried approaching her a few times, but it was a while before she dropped her guard and we became friends."

Or I could tell you about a guy who joined our Linux  Users Group but didn't say anything by saying, "Joe Blow joined the LUG a few months ago, but he didn't drop his guard and participate in discussions until last week."

My point is that he didn't post a "How to get children to drop their guard and let you molest them," he said something to the effect of, "talking to kids can be difficult because it takes a while for them to drop their guard, but if you're honest it can be a wonderful relationship."  Replace the word "kids" with "girls" in that sentence and tell me there's something wrong with it.

What you don't like is the fact that he likes young girls.  That's the issue; this statement is a non issue.

[ Parent ]

oh for heaven's sake (2.33 / 3) (#159)
by livus on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:49:35 AM EST

he could "like" babies for all I care; I'm not the thought police.

Anyway it's futile arguing about it - let's just ask him.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

ok then (2.75 / 4) (#162)
by binford2k on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:56:47 AM EST

yeah, that could have been worded better.  I guess this topic is fucked up enough that there's no need for "politeness" anyways!

You don't like the fact that he fucks little girls*.  That's the issue.  Not the "drop their guard" comment.  Getting someone to drop their guard is something that is a normal occurrence in everyday life.

* or at least he used to?  Now that he's getting married, if he's still fucking little girls he's got even more issues.  And for the record, I don't like it either.

[ Parent ]

penny slowly drops (3.00 / 3) (#163)
by livus on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:07:07 AM EST

oh I see. No I don't dispute that at all.

Okay, now I see what you were thinking, sort of. I wasn't taking issue with the dropping guard comment per se, I was citing it to explain why I thought he fell into what the original post there defines as a predator category of actions/grooming rather than mere fantasies.  

There have been a number of comments pointing out that having a pedophile orientation isn't the same thing as actual child molesting, and that child molesting isn't the same as forceful child rape. All of which are points I agree with. I was just trying to get some clarity.

 

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

Tell me something (2.66 / 6) (#121)
by truth rhesus death on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:14:57 PM EST

Why does every single pedophilia-related story get voted to the front page?

Is child pornography, underage sex, and so forth just that interesting? No, it is not.

Do pedophiles write exceptionally well so pedophilia articles are consequently of exceptional quality? Probably not.

Is Kuro5hin.org jam-packed with child molesters who like to read about sexually exploited children? Getting warmer.

Are the perverted pedophiles that populate Kuro5hin.org seeking affirmation of their deviance from each other? I think we have a winner!

rusty on the readership: You're wicked retarded, and you talk like a fag.

Pedophile self-pity is ted-1ous (3.00 / 3) (#180)
by rusty on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:51:34 AM EST

Film at -11

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Wrong on all counts (2.50 / 4) (#181)
by daveybaby on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:00:09 AM EST

K5 is jam-packed with attention seeking trolls who want to see this voted to the front page because of the shit-storm of earnest fuckwits it will attact. We want our FNH sequel.

[ Parent ]
let's not ignore sexual predators (2.20 / 5) (#144)
by BottleRocket on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:43:42 AM EST

we both know they're out there, otherwise what would be the point of the amber warning system? you have to admit that you are in the company of some very sick individuals. i suppose consenting adults do some pretty sick stuff too- god knows i have some bizarre fetishes- but i contend that it takes a particular level of pathological detachment to rape an extreme minor.

my question is about rehabilitation. is it possible? is it safe? do you know any predatory pedophiles? what are their thoughts on the matter?

wouldn't you agree that there must be cases where the offender lacks both the willpower and the motivation to get rehabilitated? what solutions would you offer?

$ . . . . . $ . . . . . $ . . . . . $
. ₩ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . *
$ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Yes I do download [child pornography], but I don't keep it any longer than I need to, so it can yield insight as to how to find more. --MDC
$ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
. . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . * . . . . . *
. ₩ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ . . . . . $ . . . . . $ . . . . . $
$B R Σ III$

Water? (2.00 / 4) (#146)
by j1mmy on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:54:05 AM EST

Is this why you can't get a date?

The reason I can't get a date (2.50 / 2) (#316)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:15:41 PM EST

is because the love of my life wouldn't stand for it. :)

[ Parent ]
She doesn't have to know (2.93 / 15) (#334)
by Stjck on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:26:32 PM EST

Sneak off after her bedtime or when she's in daycare.

[ Parent ]
Get over yourself. (2.50 / 8) (#147)
by Kasreyn on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:54:14 AM EST

Q: Kids don't have the mental capacity blah blah blah.

A: Neither do most adults (yes I've had several adult gfs).


Oh boo fucking hoo. We had to pick an age. We picked (insert age of consent in your area here). We're all well aware that some people over the age are mental children, and some under it are geniuses. As if we could handle this sort of thing on a case by case basis! Do you really want some dumbass social worker or (worse yet) child psychologist put in charge of this sort of decision? A standard age is the best solution.

It seems you think consent is just a minor aspect of the issue, but to me (and I suspect to many here) it IS the issue. Either deal with the consent issue intelligently and respectfully, or don't be surprised when your argument is ignored.


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
I think his point (2.88 / 9) (#167)
by kitten on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:31:01 AM EST

is that since most people, of any age, are emotional cripples and, dare I say it, stupid, then it becomes hard to whine about how The Kids don't have the mental abliity to make "informed consent".

Naturally this is met with horrible resistance -- no one wants to think that they might be one of the stupid ones, and how dare you say adults are too stupid to handle sex! But I think a cursory examination of how our society, and the individuals within it, approach sex, confirms this.

By the way, the arbitrary age limit is a shitty solution (and no, I don't really have a better one off the top of my head). It leads to hundreds of idiotic cases where someone is branded a "sex offender" for the rest of his life because when he was 17 he had sex with his 15 year old girlfriend. Gimme a break. The same limit also lets you have sex with a 16 year old, but if you take pictures you're in possession of "underage pornography". Riiiiight.
mirrorshades radio - darkwave, synthpop, industrial, futurepop.
[ Parent ]
Age difference (2.75 / 4) (#217)
by Coryoth on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:52:01 PM EST

Many countries have a more lenient system than the US when it comes to underage sex between children - that is, the age of consent varies depending on the age of the parties involved: a 17 year old and a 15 year old having sex doesn't fall into the same category as a 30 year old and a 15 year old. Australia, for instance, has laws in many states that allow a difference in age of 2 years or less to be used as a defense for anyone over the age of 10. Other variations also exist. Ultimately much of the issue is with the power imbalance between someone significantly older. You can find that reflected in the fact that, again, many countries have different age of consent laws if the child is under the case of the accused (as in guardians, teachers, etc.) that have higher ages of consent.

[ Parent ]
I'd go on to say that (2.33 / 6) (#219)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:19:29 PM EST

children and adults have different intellecutal strengths as well.  Child intelligence may be less abstract and developed but it's more flexible and imaginitive. Most childhood geniuses go on to be adult geniuses, and childhood dumbasses go on to be adult dumbasses.

But anyway, for the age thing is people seem to not realize is that in areas where laws make the least ammount of sense it's because they come from a time period when kids weren't even allowed to have sex with eachother.  Like "you go to jail if you have sex after you turn 18"  No, well, really you weren't supposed to be having sex with your gf when you were 17 either.  In places where childhood sexuality is now permitted they have the age gap statute.  If you have sex with a minor you need to be within an x year window (typically 3 years).  And as for child pornagraphy laws so the fuck what, deal with it. If you take pictures of kids having sex, even if it's yourself, realize the risk. We can't have 12 year olds throwing orgies and taking pictures and posting them on 4chan now can we?

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

So what if it's confirmed? (3.00 / 3) (#224)
by Kasreyn on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:09:06 PM EST

The same argument applies to anything, be it gun control or drivers' licensing. I'm sure everyone at this site is aware that 90% of adults are just large children. But at some point we need to have this polite fiction, this myth of the "grownup". It's the only way for society to keep from eating itself.

I mean, fuck it. If you really want to take things to extremes, we could apply hard determinism to society and no longer hold anyone responsible for ANYthing (since, technically speaking, we're not). So since we've all clearly decided to engage in a communal fantasy anyway, why not set a few arbitrary rules as we go along?

Would you like your flying hippos in pink or blue?

And yes, it's shitty when a 17-year-old gets nailed. But it doesn't happen often, and I honestly think it's the best we can do. You certainly put a lot more thought into rebutting me than the author did in his story; that's kind of sad (for him).


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
[ Parent ]
Well, part of the problem (2.57 / 7) (#258)
by kitten on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:49:37 PM EST

Part of the problem is that our society has this remarkably puritan and hostile attitude towards sex. We think our kids will become raging sexaholics if they see a half-second flash of Janet Jackson's nipple on TV, but we have no problem with showing people being murdered on TV. The outrage at Grand Theft Auto wasn't that the game involves shooting people, beating the hell out of hookers, beating the hell out of drivers, and driving like a lunatic to cause widespread mayhem and destruction. No sir, that was fine, until the Hot Coffee mod let you see pixellated nudity. Oh dear me, here come the Think Of The Children crowd!

In other words (and I'm sure you know this) we keep our children -- and teenagers -- ridiculously sheltered from anything that could possibly be considered even remotely sexual. We act like it doesn't exist, and that it's something shameful and should never be discussed.

And then we wonder why they can't handle it! Gosh, what a surprise. If a kid has never touched a hot stove, never seen a hot stove, and only heard of hot stoves through vague references and subtle suggestion, then is anyone going to be surprised that he burns himself the first time he gets to actually encounter a hot stove?

(Incidentally, I also love how our society gets all morally righteous about this topic, yet used to clamor to see 17-year-old Britney Spears dressed like a 12-year-old schoolgirl, just to pick one example out of thousands of how we looove to see young sexy people.. until it maybe involves our own kids.)
mirrorshades radio - darkwave, synthpop, industrial, futurepop.
[ Parent ]
It's simple (3.00 / 6) (#284)
by nightfire on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:21:21 PM EST

I think it's pretty simple.

Highly religious people want to control sex so they can use it to manipulate people.  If you live a sexless life, you search for other sources of strength and release.  The church can be one.

Sex is a charged topic and can be used to split and divide people.  Also useful for the Church, and the government.

It used to be the case that gay sex, different forms of sex, sex outside of marriage, etc., were all illegal (at least in the US).  This was useful.

Fortunately, adult legal rights were used to circumvent and eventually delete most of the laws restricting sex.

People under 18 don't have rights (otherwise a 17 year old could sue the state to delete the law that prohibits him from doin his teacher), per se... so the laws will probably remain forever.

As a side benefit (for the church and/or government), indoctrinating kids into thinking sex is evil, dirty and sick (something you're "guilty" of) makes for more easily manipulatable adults with less emotional control.  Witness this discussion. :)

[ Parent ]

Oh, I agree. (3.00 / 3) (#352)
by kitten on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:24:03 PM EST

I also think it's fucking retarded.

I note with some amusement that those who are the most reactionary about sex, those with the strongest opinions about what's "right" and "wrong", are often the very same people who lead sheltered, drab, whitebread lives, the very same people who are completely incapable, mentally or culturally, of forming informed and intelligent opinions on the topic. Figures.
mirrorshades radio - darkwave, synthpop, industrial, futurepop.
[ Parent ]
Indeed. :) (2.50 / 4) (#358)
by nightfire on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:48:10 PM EST

But that's true about most people who hold very strong opinions about right and wrong.

I think the wiser you get, the more you question yourself and your beliefs. :)

[ Parent ]

The better solution (2.33 / 3) (#483)
by Pseudonym on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 06:14:45 PM EST

I've said it previously, but I'll repeat it:

The "better solution" than having an arbitrary cut-off date is to scale the "age of consent" down by age difference. In my state, we have an "age of consent" of 16, but it's not illegal to have sex when you're younger, if the age difference isn't too great. The legal age difference reduces as the age decreases.

So 14 + 16 would be legal, as would 11 + 12, but 10 + 13 would not. And, of course, all bets are off if there's an "in care" relationship, like one being a teacher or babysitter.


sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
[ Parent ]
This is what need to happen. (2.66 / 3) (#176)
by Comrade Wonderful on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:14:17 AM EST

As if we could handle this sort of thing on a case by case basis!

This is what eventually needs to happen, for everything.

[ Parent ]

We need more trolls like this. (2.20 / 5) (#152)
by Psycho Dave on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:04:12 AM EST

Personally, I want to know what floridasun's other username is. Let the witchhunt begin!

1 vote for localroger [nt] (2.40 / 5) (#154)
by BJH on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:17:58 AM EST


--
Roses are red, violets are blue.
I'm schizophrenic, and so am I.
-- Oscar Levant

[ Parent ]
It's Psycho Dave, I'm sure of it. [nt] (1.50 / 2) (#382)
by Entendre Entendre on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:16:30 AM EST


--
Reduce firearm violence: aim carefully.
[ Parent ]

IRTT 9/10 (2.60 / 5) (#153)
by daveybaby on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:13:40 AM EST

Quality. Obvious subject, but extremely well executed.

I agree. LJ hit a homer this time. (2.40 / 5) (#168)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:32:14 AM EST


----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

There's a basic moral line here (2.80 / 10) (#157)
by nebbish on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:38:55 AM EST

Don't fuck kids, it affects their emotional development, no matter how gentle you are about it.

Don't look at child porn, you are supporting making your self implicit in what is perhaps the worst exploitation possible.

But if you keep it in your own head, don't feel guilty. You're not doing anyone any harm.

---------
Kicking someone in the head is like punching them in the foot - Bruce Lee

IAWTP (3.00 / 6) (#178)
by daveybaby on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:32:06 AM EST

I want to have sex with attractive women - doesnt mean i'm gonna rape them.

I want lots of money - doesnt mean i'm gonna commit armed robbery.

You cant necessarily control what you are, but you can control what you do. Its called being a grown up (irony).

[ Parent ]

bravo, well said nt (2.33 / 3) (#192)
by circletimessquare on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 01:34:08 PM EST



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
hmmm (2.33 / 9) (#194)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 02:21:08 PM EST

"affects their emotional development" is a pretty strange claim to make. Nearly anything you do around a kid affects their emotional development some can be very detrimental and screw the kid up for life but are perfectly legal. I'd much rather see young girls in loving sexual relationships with men, for example, then be subjected to very legal emotional abuse everyday.

The reason being that when a girl isn't raped but does have sexal relationships with an adult male she's usually not fucked up for life over it.  But girls raised by narcissistic or neglegent parents end up with severe personality disorders and it makes their entire adult life a struggle.

Boys having sex with adult men however is a different case. Because there's so much confusion and shame over the homosexual aspect of it later on (obviously has something to do with our culture as well)..  to the extent that I think it fucks them up a lot more than it does girls.

I'm not advocating sex with girls however, I just think that if you're going to make some blanket statement at least have it make sense, or finish it. It's our jobs as adults to affect the emotional development of children...  so if you're going to argue that line please be more specific.

I'm happy with locking up any male that has sex with a minor girl more with a more than 3 year age difference though but it's more out of concern for our cultural standards, as well as to make sure everybody has a childhood. I think people who have more experiences as children end up more rounded, and jumping into adult relationships skims over that experience too much. Plus the emotional impact on the parents ond other figures is too great. In cultures where it's legal to have their teenage daughter run off with some successful older man, the daughter might be perfectly fine and happy, but the family is sometimes distraught over the matter.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

addendum (2.50 / 6) (#202)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:17:09 PM EST

another reason why i'm fine with the laws is the fact that a lot of inexperienced and naive people, both children and adults, have a very hard time of distinguishing sexual predators from people that truly get something out of a sexual relationship.  Coming to terms with this is something that nearly everybody goes thorugh (yes even boys/men - though it's not fashionable to admit)..   and like most other challenges/responsibilities in life, like earning a living to support yourself is a burden that children shouldn't have to bare.  The problem is compounded by the fact that most people that would have sexual relations with children tend to be predators. A quick perusal of perverted justice would reveal this to be true. They act like they care about the person but all they care about is that person's hole(s).

So the extent of negative impact both honest and dishonest relationships have on children varies greatly from person to person, some feel negative, others nuetral, and others still positive about it - the same could be said for entering the workforce early - but dang, just let kids have a childhood.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

immaterial (2.50 / 6) (#205)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:21:27 PM EST

i make no judgement behind the nobility of one's caring.

Behind most selfless acts is a selfish motive. rational self interest and all.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

I should have said (2.50 / 1) (#413)
by nebbish on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:08:48 AM EST

"fucks with their emotional development." More accurate.

---------
Kicking someone in the head is like punching them in the foot - Bruce Lee
[ Parent ]

Question: Please clear up one thing for us (2.75 / 4) (#158)
by livus on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:45:04 AM EST

Dear Floridasun,

Binford and I are discussing the probable extent of your sexual activity with girls in your preferred age group.

Binford thinks you've just said that you don't do it; I think you've just said that you do it.

Binford seems to think that all you have ever done (apart from your fiance) is talk to girls; whereas I think you were trying to say that you had a number of these underage "girlfriends" with whom you were sexually active. I also think you indicated that your gf and you consume child porn together. Is this accurate?

Please can you just clarify for us what you actually do, or at least what you are saying exactly?  

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

a bit off topic for this thread (3.00 / 1) (#160)
by binford2k on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:51:04 AM EST

but that's not what I was saying at all.  He flat out admitted that he boned his now fiance when she was 11 and he was 19 or so.  (which for the record, I think is pretty fucked up and probably signifies a confidence problem)

All I said was that the "let their guard down" comment was a non-issue.  The comment, not the tendency to get naked with girls with not much older than my own daughter.

[ Parent ]

try 16 or 17. (2.85 / 14) (#170)
by Linux or FreeBSD on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:52:47 AM EST

note "grade 11." it's not that much better, but maybe a little.

[ Parent ]
what do you mean by "issue"? (2.00 / 1) (#378)
by livus on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:02:41 AM EST

I can't quite work out what you think I was saying.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
Answer (2.00 / 3) (#318)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:24:50 PM EST

It depends on your definition of sex I guess, but yes I had a couple other relationships before I met my current gf.  It wasn't just talking. :)

One is a good friend now (and quite jealous hehe), and the other I've lost touch with.

She dumped me for some guy the same age as me and last I heard she still living with him and starting university.

My fiance and I do not "consume" child porn, but yes occasionally we look at pictures of girls which some may consider pornographic.

Hard core porn for me is quite a turnoff (be it adult or under-18).

[ Parent ]

You don't like porn? Good, you're not some perv (3.00 / 2) (#319)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:31:19 PM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
You don't like porn? (2.00 / 1) (#496)
by Water on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 07:24:40 PM EST

I'm confused.

[ Parent ]
Author's Username = Underage Softcore Porn Site (2.28 / 7) (#161)
by anaesthetica on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:53:09 AM EST

The author of this story is "floridasun". This documentary on underage softcore porn sites clearly shows Florida Sun Models. Their webpage is here.

We have either been trolled or used for free advertising.

—I'm the little engine that didn't.
k5: our trolls go to eleven
[A]S FAR AS A PERSON'S ACTIONS ARE CONCERNED, IT IS NOT TRUE THAT NOTHING BUT GOOD COMES FROM GOOD AND NOTHING BUT EVIL COMES FROM EVIL, BUT RATHER QUITE FREQUENTLY THE OPPOSITE IS THE CASE. ANYONE WHO DOES NOT REALIZE THIS IS IN FACT A MERE CHILD IN POLITICAL MATTERS. max weber, politics as a vocation


that's not porn (2.75 / 8) (#182)
by dongs on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:17:41 AM EST



[ Parent ]
Didn't stop me jerking off to it [nt] (2.50 / 6) (#188)
by Stjck on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:32:52 PM EST



[ Parent ]
HOTTT (2.66 / 9) (#191)
by dongs on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 01:17:07 PM EST

PHATT

[ Parent ]
no different than the fashion model industry (2.50 / 8) (#209)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:54:00 PM EST

except they use normal teens instead of exceptionally beautiful teens. Can't take this site down without seriously reforming the entire fashion industry.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
*crack* (2.78 / 14) (#172)
by Sgt York on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:28:51 AM EST

AND IT'S A POP FLY DEEP INTO LEFT FIELD...FLORIDASUN IS OFF TO FIRST....IT'S HEADED TO FOSTER...HE FALLS BACK....JUMPS AT THE WALL --OH!!! IT'S OUTTA HERE! *hahhhh---hahhhhh* THE CROWD GOES WILD!

I mean, asking not to make it a flamewar...the artistry, the blatant artistry. I almost feel like biting and diving into it wholeheartedly, just for the ride.

+1FP, best since FNH. Bravo.

There is a reason for everything. Sometimes, that reason just sucks.

MotorMachineMercenary, (2.11 / 9) (#177)
by Comrade Wonderful on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:19:02 AM EST

I am so sorry to hear of the difficulties you have dealing with this condition.  I now recognize your macho posturing to be only a reaction against this inherent weakness you feel.  Allow me to join you in cursing the day that treehouse went up!

Yep, I'm certainly the only one to feel like this (2.50 / 4) (#183)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:30:58 AM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
I dispute that very much. (2.50 / 4) (#186)
by Comrade Wonderful on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:20:24 PM EST



[ Parent ]
That's my fucking point, tovarich /nt (2.25 / 4) (#195)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 02:42:03 PM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
I know. nt. (2.00 / 1) (#404)
by Comrade Wonderful on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 09:43:19 AM EST



[ Parent ]
hey asshole (2.57 / 7) (#185)
by cDiss on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:04:45 PM EST

its people like you that get 90% of exit nodes banned at 4chan

Hmmm (2.00 / 3) (#187)
by HollyHopDrive on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:28:10 PM EST

I'll assume you're not a troll. And from that I'll assume it took real guts to spill this to us.

It's not the first article I've read by a paedophile. But the other one I read was about someone who said he felt deeply ashamed of his urges and believed them to be abnormal. He said he would never touch a child, but he was obsessed with images and fantasies and that much he couldn't help. I didn't like it but I appreciated that as long as it stayed in his head it wasn't hurting anyone.

I'm afraid you will never convince me that kids having sex, either with each other or with adults, is ever excusable, much less desirable. I'll admit there's a remote possibility of sexual love existing between a grown man and a ten year old girl which is as pure and sweet as the freshly fallen snow and the dewdrops on the rose, but that would be so rare so as not to figure when we're drafting the sex legislation. And really, why can't it wait a few years if you love each other so much? Perhaps she really is emotionally wise beyond her years, but isn't it better to wait a bit to make sure? Nobody was ever harmed by waiting until they hit puberty before having sex.

I can believe the urges are more common than we like to admit. I actually have a few memories of men stroking my neck and shoulders when I was about ten or 11 (and I was a late developer) and making what I now realise were suggestive comments. I didn't like it and I jumped away but it hasn't scarred me. Still, just because the urges may be common doesn't necessarily mean they are harmless.

If you lose your virginity at 10, it wouldn't exactly be difficult to see why you might never be able to depart from something so intense experienced so early.

I do have one question, though. If you had a ten-year-old daughter, would you be happy for a grown man to have sex with her?

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.

And one more question (2.85 / 7) (#189)
by HollyHopDrive on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 12:38:57 PM EST

All these points about the girl consenting and being perfectly happy with having sex at ten and so on seem to come from the men. Could your wife write an article or at least a post about her own experience?

Your article reminds me that in all the paedophilia debates I've ever read or heard, I never actually heard a woman who lost her virginity as a child give her view, just the men who slept with children. I would really like to have this balanced out for once.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

She says: (2.00 / 2) (#322)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:43:29 PM EST

hi this is his fiance,

he wasn't the first guy I slept with so quite trying to liberate and protect me.  if you aren't ready for sex dont' have sex what's the big deal.  it was a lifetime ago but that was the best summer i ever had, and you should be so lucky to find someone as caring and strong.

b

[ Parent ]

Interesting. (2.50 / 4) (#393)
by HollyHopDrive on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:05:00 AM EST

Both you and your partner talk long and hard about people not castigating you and judging you. And when I do you the common courtesy of asking you to speak for yourself rather than having someone speak for you - in other words, I ask you to do the adult thing and show some concern - you turn rude, holier than thou, and cast aspersions on my own relationship.

Isn't that interesting?

It's not actually you I'm trying to protect, sweetie. It's other kids (and may I add that you express yourself like a ten-year-old - what should I make of that?). Perhaps you were ready at ten years old, but the vast majority of kids that age are not. And simply saying "if you don't want to, don't" doesn't cut it for someone who is almost certainly too young to make any kind of adult decision.

I am actually quite flabbergasted that you think people discussing child sex is all about liberating and protecting YOU. There's a word for that kind of self-obsessiveness. It is "childish."

And it's also childish to think having slept with several people means a person doesn't need protection. In my experience, it usually means the precise opposite.

But then, what do I know? I was well past puberty when I lost my virginity, and my adult boyfriend of close to five years isn't as strong and caring as yours, right?

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

heh the irony here of course (2.00 / 6) (#396)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 08:33:38 AM EST

is you interpreted her "you" to mean "you, hollyhopdrive" when most people would have read it as her expressing her thoughts to the 2nd person - as in not her.  Yet you call her self-obsessed.  Which is even funnier since you were asking her for her personal account not policies about underage sexuality.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
Actually (1.00 / 1) (#402)
by HollyHopDrive on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 09:31:47 AM EST

I was referring to the second "you", not the first one. But thanks for making an irrelevant point and ignoring the actual issue at hand.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

I was referring to both (1.50 / 2) (#406)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 09:54:50 AM EST

who cares if you only read into the second like a high strung whack job instead of the first?

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
You know, you're right. (1.66 / 3) (#419)
by HollyHopDrive on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:29:52 AM EST

I shouldn't have called her self-obsessed, and if she's reading this, I take it back and apologise.

My point would be better made thus:

Ok, so you had sex at the age of ten or 11 and you're fine. I'm glad you're OK. And for the sake of this argument, let's say that your relationship is pure, true and wholly appropriate.

But for the vast majority of 11-year-olds, this could not possibly be the case. And by allowing fully grown men (or women) to have sex with them, we create a responsibility for them to make their wishes clear, which children usually can't and never should have to make.

Our laws would, had you kept them, have made it impossible for you to consummate your relationship for a few years. I'm sure this would have been difficult. My heart bleeds.

But without those laws, it would have been much easier for immature, vulnerable children to be molested and raped and be told they had consented.

You having to wait a few years weighed up against protecting children until they've at least had a chance to grow up a bit and learn what's good for them?

To me, it's no contest.

It's a little bit of communal responsibility. Less harm is done by your waiting until you're 18 for sex than by saying to ten-year-olds "well, if you don't want to then don't. You don't need any extra legislation to protect you."

And FTR - just because you had sex with several people by the age of 11 doesn't mean you don't need protection. I think it probably means the opposite.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

Moving the goalposts? (2.50 / 4) (#632)
by vectro on Sun Dec 31, 2006 at 01:25:11 PM EST

HHD: I've never actually heard any young women weigh in on this debate.

Young Woman: It's fine and totally consensual, so screw off.

HHD: I'm not talking to you, I'm talking about the other, generic young women.

HollyHopDrive, it's not fair to first complain about the lack of anecdotal stories and then ignore any anecdotal stories that come up as a result. Either they matter or they don't; please don't try to have it both ways.

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]

don't you ever shut up (1.25 / 4) (#418)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:27:48 AM EST



[ Parent ]
My answer (none / 1) (#321)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:37:05 PM EST

I'll assume you're not a troll. And from that I'll assume it took real guts to spill this to us.

It's not the first article I've read by a paedophile. But the other one I read was about someone who said he felt deeply ashamed of his urges and believed them to be abnormal. He said he would never touch a child, but he was obsessed with images and fantasies and that much he couldn't help. I didn't like it but I appreciated that as long as it stayed in his head it wasn't hurting anyone.

:(

I'm afraid you will never convince me that kids having sex, either with each other or with adults, is ever excusable, much less desirable.

I won't try.

I'll admit there's a remote possibility of sexual love existing between a grown man and a ten year old girl which is as pure and sweet as the freshly fallen snow and the dewdrops on the rose,

Ok, let's assume it's a remote possibility.  So, if/when it does happen, would you find it in your heart to excuse it?  Is not a pure and sweet relationship desireable?

but that would be so rare so as not to figure when we're drafting the sex legislation.

I find the whole idea of sex legislation a little repugnant.  But anyway.

And really, why can't it wait a few years if you love each other so much?

Why 18?  Why not 20?  25?  Marriage?

Perhaps she really is emotionally wise beyond her years, but isn't it better to wait a bit to make sure?

You can really get to know someone over a few months.

Nobody was ever harmed by waiting until they hit puberty before having sex.  I can believe the urges are more common than we like to admit. I actually have a few memories of men stroking my neck and shoulders when I was about ten or 11 (and I was a late developer) and making what I now realise were suggestive comments. I didn't like it and I jumped away but it hasn't scarred me. Still, just because the urges may be common doesn't necessarily mean they are harmless.

It doesn't mean that they are harmful either.

If you lose your virginity at 10, it wouldn't exactly be difficult to see why you might never be able to depart from something so intense experienced so early.
I do have one question, though. If you had a ten-year-old daughter, would you be happy for a grown man to have sex with her?

I answered this question here:

http://www.kuro5hin.org/comments/2006/12/17/164535/36=3fpid=3d30#36

[ Parent ]

Answer (1.50 / 2) (#392)
by HollyHopDrive on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 04:57:54 AM EST

I won't try.

Then why did you write the article?

Ok, let's assume it's a remote possibility.  So, if/when it does happen, would you find it in your heart to excuse it?

Never. I think what you did was wrong and perverse, and I don't believe marriage covers up the crime. If you loved her so much and she was so wise beyond her age, I think you should have waited a few years so that you could be sure, and be certain that you weren't harming her. I see nothing wrong with being childhood sweethearts and then consummating the relationship as adults.

Is not a pure and sweet relationship desireable?

Yes, but at that age you couldn't possibly have known for sure that it was. Kids of 18, 19 and 20 go mad at university because they are searching for an identity. How can you say a ten-year-old child knows who she is so certainly? It is entirely possible that having moulded her so hard when so young, she doesn't know how to grow in any other directions. Or maybe not. But as I said, if not, she's so rare she doesn't figure when we draft the legislation designed to protect innocent, immature children from rapists. By giving ten-year-olds the right to consent, you also give them the responsibility to make a refusal clear.

Would you trust the average ten year old even to go to bed at the right time or eat a healthy diet?

I find the whole idea of sex legislation a little repugnant.

It is there to protect vulnerable people. I know what you said about vulnerable adults, but they at least have had time enough to have a chance to develop. Children haven't.

Besides, without sex legislation, anyone would have the chance to molest your wife without penalty. Do you like that?

Do you really think it is harmful, damaging and repugnant to try to ensure that people wait until the decrepit, ripe old age of 16 or 18 before they begin having sex?

Why 18?  Why not 20?  25?  Marriage?

It's 16 where I live, and I'll freely admit that the age is difficult to ascertain. But you are in a very small minority if you think there should be no lower age limit at all. In most countries, the age is anything from 14 to 18. The idea is that one's mind isn't likely to advance that far ahead of one's body (as someone who's been menstruating since the age of 13, I know) so we attempt to set an age where we hope the two have gone into sync for the majority of people.

Most people would try to set the age a little higher to err on the side of caution.

Which is more likely to cause long-term damage? Waiting until you are 18 until you lose your virginity, or giving full legal and social carte blanche to grown men having sex with ten-year-olds?

You can really get to know someone over a few months.

But the law doesn't exist for a case by case basis. It exists to try to protect the majority of people. I maintain that you would have risked far less by waiting until she was an adult than by taking her virgnity when she was still at an age when Barbie dolls and teddies could be on her Christmas list.

You remind me of a friend who constantly drives well over the speed limit because he thinks he can drive better than other people. Perhaps he can. But if he's allowed, then it's only fair everyone else should be allowed. And that will be dangerous.

Them's the rules, and they apply to everyone. And when they involve other people - be they drivers or children - think long and hard about why you should be allowed to break them if nobody else can.

It doesn't mean that they are harmful either.

The fact that they are common, no. But take into account everything else, and yes, they are.

I answered this question here:

http://www.kuro5hin.org/comments/2006/12/17/164535/36=3fpid=3d30#36

The link doesn't work for me. Please copy and paste.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

Wha??? (1.50 / 2) (#537)
by kbudha on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 10:36:09 AM EST

"Would you trust the average ten year old even to go to bed at the right time or eat a healthy diet?"

Do any of us go to bed on time or eat as healthy as we should?

These questions don't entail any type of maturity.

And please don't use your vegetarian, uber-superiority complex, "I'm sooo perfect and you're not" lifestyle as an example to how YOU live and eat so healthy, why shouldn't everybody.

NO VEGETARIAN DISH ON THE PLANET compares to a filet mignon steak or BBQ ribs or lamb tika massala or burbon chicken.
.

[ Parent ]

At what point does it start to disturb you? (2.50 / 8) (#193)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 02:04:06 PM EST

You mentioned being a junior in Highschool having sex with an 11 year old which despite the odds turned out to be a strong relationship resulting in marriage.  So you were 16 or 17, which means about 5 or 6 years older.  Not much in terms of years, but at that age it is the difference between being a child and nearly an adult.

My question for you, though... is there's a point at which the age difference just seems too fucked up to you and that no ammount of mutual attraction or love would justify a sexual relationship.  Where do you draw the line?  Is a 40 year old having sex with a 9 year old a repulsive thought to you?

And if there is a boundary how do you feel about pedophiles controlling their impulses? I for one, attracted though I may be to teenage girls have no problem at all controlling that attraction. I'm not such a horndog that I need to fuck any 16 year old that I can. I'm prefectly happy to stick to adult women or even celebacy if I must. The excuse that pedophiles have an innate need to act on their impulses is rediculous to me when everybody on the planet controls their impulses most of the time, if not we'd be even more of a fucked up orgy of unfaithful partners than we are already.

Anyway I'm rambling..  I guess to be succinct, while you seem fine with your less extreme case of illicit coupling, are there cases you find objectionable, and at somepoint completely unjustifiable given anybody's sexual and emotional convictions?

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!

I think we make it too complicated (2.66 / 3) (#324)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:49:37 PM EST

I think the idea of a 40 year old guy logging on the net and trying to meet a 9 year old is a fucked up.  Because there is a lot of risk that he really WILL manipulate her and he's clearly only looking for one thing.

As I said in another thread though, I don't really have a problem with it as long as BOTH people want to do it.

In practical terms I wouldn't stand in the way of a 9 year old and say "i won't allow you to keep doing this" except under very extrenuating circumstances.

[ Parent ]

Er, i pulled 9 at 40 out of the air (1.66 / 3) (#327)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:59:41 PM EST

I was asking what your boundaries are.  According to what you said anybody that's capable of having an opinion..  so like 5ish?

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
Hmmmm. (2.33 / 3) (#339)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:43:35 PM EST

I don't have any boundaries.  I would need to know the details of the situation.

I just can't bring myself to set an arbitrary age like that.

Whatever number I choose, there will be some people who are unfairly prosecuted under it, and some people who are given the "green light" when it's inappropriate.

It just really depends on each case.

I could turn the question around and ask you what an appropriate age to stop breast feeding is...

It is a sexual act, aimed at supporting reproduction, which is permitted until age 2 or so.

At which point does it become strictly for gratification?

5?  10?

[ Parent ]

by CTS's metrics, this is the best story EVAR (2.60 / 5) (#196)
by cDiss on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 02:44:29 PM EST



Yes. You are right. ~/nt (2.25 / 4) (#207)
by 1419 on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:27:54 PM EST



[ Parent ]
agreed. 100% (3.00 / 1) (#518)
by circletimessquare on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 01:58:17 AM EST

the site i'm building, it would be all pedophilies, nazis, creationists, racists, homophobes, polygamists, etc...

can you imagine anything more glorious?


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

Do you view child pornography (2.50 / 4) (#200)
by Water on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:13:54 PM EST

knowing that it was most likely non consensual? Do you think it should be illegal?

Why are you replying to your own story? (2.25 / 4) (#259)
by kitten on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:52:24 PM EST


mirrorshades radio - darkwave, synthpop, industrial, futurepop.
[ Parent ]
Interesting question. (2.33 / 3) (#325)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:54:00 PM EST

It depends on your definition.  If it's clear in the picture that the person is not enjoying it, I find it repulsive.

If it's clear that they are enjoying it, it can be a turn-on.

I think the production (not possession) of HC under-14 porn should be banned, because there is a real risk it could be rape which will be broadcast all over the world.  And especially with the current hysteria that would suck.

However, nude art and fashion stuff is fine by me.

[ Parent ]

Porn (2.00 / 1) (#526)
by Xptic on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 04:27:07 AM EST

Most people in porn don't enjoy what they do.

[ Parent ]
It's unfortunate this story will die (2.50 / 4) (#212)
by rhapsody on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:27:08 PM EST

There is some actually real and interesting discussion going on here.  However the story is unlikely to survive.  I'd post my thoughts however I feel that they would be lost and it would be a waste of time.

So if you write a book about this and that book (2.00 / 2) (#215)
by 1419 on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:47:04 PM EST

lasts 1,000 years before people stop reading it, is that any different?

[ Parent ]
What I am saying (3.00 / 2) (#225)
by rhapsody on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:09:58 PM EST

The story will get buried, the discussion is going to get lost because of that, its barely keeping its head above water in the queue right now.

I could say how I first had sex at a young age with a man much older than myself.  I could also say that I don't think its ever hurt me in the least.  I could offer my views and try to show why the author of the article isn't the scum that people are going to make him out to be in this discussion. However its all going to go away, and that's sort of sad.  Sometimes the moderation system really annoy's me.

[ Parent ]

most stories don't get many hits after (2.25 / 4) (#263)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:56:22 PM EST

they post anyway, the discussion still happens and gets the most eyes while it's still in the queue. Just curious if you're male or female?

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
Female /nt (1.50 / 1) (#433)
by rhapsody on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:18:31 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Are You still monitoring this story? (1.00 / 1) (#638)
by rhapsody on Thu Jan 04, 2007 at 08:45:31 PM EST

Now that the discussion has  died down and will not  get  lost, I'd  love to speak more  with  you on this.

[ Parent ]
Seems to have disappeared (none / 0) (#640)
by nightfire on Sat Jan 06, 2007 at 09:14:08 PM EST

He posted a message in another thread saying he was leaving.  He hasn't responded to a couple questioned I posted either.

But I'd be curious to hear your story..

[ Parent ]

What I was going to say (none / 0) (#641)
by rhapsody on Sun Jan 07, 2007 at 11:28:34 AM EST

It seems to be that good discussion gets lost to the trolls in the initial rush.  I like to wait it out and then hope those that want real discussion might still be around afterwards.

In any case.

I am female and I have been physically active with the other sex since I was about 9.  I say physically active as I can't clearly remember any real sexual arousal before I was around 11.  I don't mean this in the playing doctor way either as I have always been sexually curious so I was doing that, seeing other boys and girls naked pretty much as long as I can remember.

I don't feel that I was ever abused in any of this in fact it all seemed pretty natural to me.  My parents both slept in the nude, as did my brothers and sisters, 8 total, most of the time.  Our swimming pool was swimsuit optional. That policy almost got me in trouble once at a friends house before I knew that it wasn't a common policy. After a shower or a bath the dirty clothes and towels went down a shoot in the bathroom stright to the laundry room, after which we just walked to our rooms naked.  Often at home we would dress or not dress as the mood struck us so it wasn't unusal for myself and my siblings to play together naked or just in our underwear.  Lay on the couch or floor cuddled naked, typical kid stuff.

It seemed very natural to me to do these same sorts of things with friends.  I truly didn't understand many of the games aimed at getting each other naked until I was older.  You want to see me naked, here you go, can I see you naked now?  I suppose the games and shyness started to make sense when i was round 11 and sexual arousal became a factor.  Still I took that in stride and it all seemed fairly natural.  Mom and dad were open about sex.  They never did it right in front of us or anything.  However doors were rarely closed in our house, usually only when you were sent to your room.  If you woke up in the middle of the night, or came home in the afternoon unexpectedly you might catch mom and dad having sex.  They made it clear this was a private thing, and to move along the first time that might happen.  But that was it no hiding it, or lying about it, or embarassment.  In fact they were always open about such things.  I knew how sex worked and what the boy parts and girl parts were by the time I was 8.  I knew how to use a condom by the time I was 10, the old bannana demo!
I knew that sex was to make babies and condoms kept babies from happening until you were ready, and that it was a good idea not to be ready until you were out of mom and dads house, out of school, and had a good job.  Until then a condom was a requirement.

What all that preamble leads up to is that it didn't and still doesn't seem all that unusal to me that I had sex for the first time when I was around 11.  I had a friend a couple years older than me he was 14 or 15. It makes more sense I suppose if I mentionnthat I had skipped a couple grades so at the time I was in 8th, he had flunked 8th grade math so he had stayed back a year, we were in the same classes. I had invited him over after school to do home work.  Then we went swimming in my pool.  We were playing in the pool, I was chasing him I grabbed his ankle under water, he tipped over and tried to steady himself.  He had me in a bear hug at that point and we both were down.  I liked that feeling.  When we came back up, I kissed him.  It seemed natural.  I will not go into the pronographic details thats not want I intend for this to be about, sorry if thats what anyone was hoping.  In the end I lost my virginity about an hour later.  It seemed the most natural thing in the world to me.  Still does, since that time sex has been a natural part of any relationship I have had in my life.    

[ Parent ]

Heh (none / 0) (#642)
by nightfire on Sun Jan 07, 2007 at 06:38:56 PM EST

That's basically my experience as well.  I always thought it was pretty common (until recently), but I guess we're in the minority.

I'm guessing you're not from the US?

[ Parent ]

Yes I am actually. (none / 0) (#649)
by rhapsody on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 10:44:29 PM EST

I gew up near Norfork Va

[ Parent ]
Oh. (none / 0) (#650)
by nightfire on Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 12:57:13 AM EST

Hmm.. interesting.

[ Parent ]
Interesting Why? (none / 0) (#673)
by rhapsody on Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 02:57:57 PM EST

Why is that interesting?

[ Parent ]
Well (none / 0) (#674)
by nightfire on Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 10:31:12 PM EST

I just associate the attitude of "nudity is ok/unharmful" and "sex isn't dirty" more with europe, not with north america.  I have lots of friends from france, germany, and a couple from south america who think we're really deranged for our views here (ie. no nudity on TV but morbid violence OK before 9).

I know there are exceptions and not all the states are the same but I just figured you were more likely from overseas. :)

Anyway good to hear.

[ Parent ]

Heh the double standard (2.35 / 14) (#214)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:37:14 PM EST

right now people are flipping out over his molesting a girl but are probably thinking "way to go" about fucking his babysitter at age 10.

Now imagine if the author was a woman...

People would be saying that her molestation from the babysitter has fucked her up and emotionally crippled her and that's why she had sex with a young boy (the young boy by the way nobody would care about, good for him, he fucked a 16 year old when he was 11 - a boys dream come true right?)

Eh it all goes back to the antiquated notion that a women's worth is her worth as a wife and mother and as such she should be virginal until marriage.  That is such a vile and barbaric opinion of women, yet it's still in our culture, and taints every aspect of sexuality and our sexual psychology today.

it's just sex people, get over it. If you're going to agonize over your childhood sexuality as an adult, grow the fuck up...  Whenever it becomes socially accpetable to blame any event or person or group of people for your life's woes instead of taking positive action to fix yourself it is to the greater detriment of the people suffering psychologically.

Who cares about your past or the source of your problems, I been through some fucked up shit too but i don't let it hange there as personal demons to blame for everything about me that isn't perfect.  In some ways you gotta wonder if people who are so fucked up over being ass-fisted by their bishop as an alterboy wouldn't be fucked up over some other traumatic event anyway.

Again, i'm not condoning or greenlighting molesting kids, but there's so much bullshit going on with it that's un-PC to discuss and this is the thread to come out and say it.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!

lol what (2.00 / 8) (#220)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:40:42 PM EST

"Eh it all goes back to the antiquated notion that a women's worth is her worth as a wife and mother and as such she should be virginal until marriage.  That is such a vile and barbaric opinion of women, yet it's still in our culture, and taints every aspect of sexuality and our sexual psychology today."

A woman who's a virgin is very unlikely to have an STD or be infertile due to a previous STD. Nothing vile and barbaric about wanting a healthy fucking wife. Idiot.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
uh ok well look (2.20 / 5) (#221)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:43:07 PM EST

if you can say the same thing about a husband i don't really disagree with you, but as you see, i made no judgements really on the virtues of virginity, but rather the barbaric notion that a women's worth is primarily as a wife and/or mother rather than an individual.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
Of course it doesn't apply to men /nt (2.00 / 4) (#222)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:47:11 PM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
why not? $ (2.00 / 3) (#223)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:57:04 PM EST



---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
B/c I'm not a feminist /nt (1.80 / 5) (#227)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:25:01 PM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
I don't follow feminism (2.14 / 7) (#229)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:35:08 PM EST

but I have two eyes and a brain cell and can clearly see that women are fully capable individuals who can be valuable in any which way they choose and see no reason to suppress that plain and simple fact. You may call that feminism, I call it being realistic and not idiotic.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
Women are more valuable in and suited for (1.71 / 7) (#239)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:10:50 PM EST

creating life and child-rearing.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
Heh, there's some women i'd rather see (2.33 / 3) (#240)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:12:02 PM EST

doing other things...

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
It's changing (2.75 / 4) (#326)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:58:31 PM EST

The hysteria is reaching new levels.

There was a recent story about a 15 year old guy who got his teacher (24 i think) pregnant.  She had the baby, and was arrested.

They tried to marry him, but a judge intervened.

Though he refused to testify, she was found guilty of unauthorized sex (sex assault or something) and sentenced to jail for a few years.  The baby is in the custody of the boy's family.

If you don't find this nauseating, ... I dunno it made me very sick to read it.

[ Parent ]

Depending on the age, yes, you have harmed others (2.94 / 18) (#226)
by SocratesGhost on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:12:02 PM EST

Many children just want attention. Paedophiles teach them that they get that attention through sex.

The child-adult relationship is one built on trust. Children need room to grow and mature before they can develop into people who are capable of making their own choices. When people interfere with that process, they interfere with the child's ability to make those choices, just as your own ability to control your actions were interupted when you were that age.

I'm not sure if you see that, but you are just acting on something that was acted upon you. Because this happened to you, you find it natural, but this isn't because it was an innate desire in you. Your will, your personality, your desires, and your emotions were altered because of your experience and who you are is the result. In some ways, you're lucky you weren't introduced to heroin at 10. What makes this worse is that you find it acceptable to do this to others, to subvert their will before they developed a mature identity of their own.

Depending on the age in which you interferred with their petri dish minds, it may be impossible for them to adjust. We are sexual creatures and it affects all departments in life, from how we relate to others to how we view ourselves. You might think it's within your rights to interfere that way, but fortunately society in this case truly understands that your ambivalence is a threat.

When I was abused (by a fucked up person like you, I hope you don't mind me saying), it has taken me until now, some 20 years of failed relationships, frequent therapy, and months of reading later in order to begin to dream of having a healthy mature relationship with someone who is my equal. I'm 34, single, successful, and lonely as fuck because I cannot sustain a relationship. Is that what you wish upon others?

Also, the reason this topic is so prevalent on the web may be because of the prevalence of child abuse. In the US, statistics show that about 1 in 10 boys and maybe as high as 1 in 3 women were sexually molested as children. There's a lot of people out there whose identities have been royally screwed because it is difficult to break the cycle of abusing others who will abuse others who will abuse others.

Anyway, I pity you for not being capable of freeing yourself from the prison that someone else put you in. Thank you for writing, though, but truly seek help.

-Soc
I drank what?


kind of condescending (2.42 / 7) (#234)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:57:26 PM EST

Not to take away from your struggle with pedophilia, you apparently blame it for your struggle with relationships. This may be true, but have you also considered that it wasn't the true/only source of your struggle? Is it possible, that perhaps you chose to fixate on this as a scapegoat for your emotional turmoil?

Anyway, even if you would have had normal happy perfect love life had you not been the victim of pedophelia, clearly the author of this article has no shared suffering. Infact, he basicly rambles off on the merits and success his pedophelia has had. Wheras your experience may have resulted in a struggle with relationships, the author has indicated that his experience has resulted in successful relationships. Had he not had sex with an 11 year old at 16/17 maybe he'd be sad and lonely and struggling today rather than engaged/married.

Psychology is a soft science, and so there's no proof that pedophilia fucks people up. Indeed YMMV and that's what makes it such a tough subject and what tends to piss a lot of people off. The author seems to believe that pedophelia has been a positive part of his life as much as you believe pedophelia is a negative in your life and thus it MUST be for everyone as well. Well, that dog don't hunt...  Unfortunately, psychological wisdom is contantly being shattered by other cultures and other peoples experiences, we're not robots and have yet to fully understand everything..  but it's awfully condescending to insist that other people's lives have been negatively impacted by pedophelia when they insist it's been positive.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

Not really a scapegoat (2.40 / 5) (#269)
by SocratesGhost on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:05:38 PM EST

Even if there are other things at play, does that automatically make paedophilia harmless? Let's try something: Suppose a person were abused physically by one person and molested sexually by another. Years later, they have no sexual drive. Do you ascribe the cause of this to a) the physical abuse, or b) the sexual abuse.

Let me describe this better to you: how would you feel if one morning you woke up and had no penis? That's about what it is like to be asexual in a highly sexual world. Incapable of sexual satisfaction. Lonely. Alienated from normal human experience.

But let's stay focused on that child who, not havng a safety net, having no resources to properly integrate these experiences (because you cannot explain these things to a 10 year old), how able do you think he will be in developing a healthy, productive, mature relationship after he has been so exploited? And now that this area of life is handicapped, how do you think he will look back on his family which should have been providing a safety net but could not or would not? How do you think he'll see others: as helpful or exploitative? How capable of trusting others? How capable of actually loving?

Yes, there are other things in play at my life and each problem amplifies the other. Now, do you think my recovery from those other abuses are hindered or helped by my molestation?

I don't struggle with paedophilia myself, I was molested by someone closer to my age, but my concern isn't so much the age difference but the inappropriateness of using 10 year olds for sexual purposes. As I said, it robs them of their opportunity to develop. That's not just my opinion but the opinion of every piece of serious research on the subject that I've read (and I'm not a selective reader).

Meanwhile, the author of this piece only talks about the merits to himself but very seldom looks at the harm he is doing to others. He casually dismisses all harm by equating the mental faculty of children to adults, as though the development and capabilities of the human mind at age 10 were anything similar to that of age 20.

And, yes, there is plenty of proof that exposing children to sex retards emotional development(whether it's from paedophilia, molestationg, daddy being curious, etc.). Soft science, ha! One study showed that 90% of violent offenders in one prison were sexually molested. Another shows the frequency of divorce is 3 times more likely if one of the partners were molested. Molested children are four times more likely to commit suicide than the norm. 95% of prostitutes were molested (one study in Philadelphia couldn't find a prostitute who wasn't molested). Drug use is higher. Few children react the same way to being sexualized at a young age, particularly if its' repeated, and only a rare few suffer no ill consequences.

Jesus, man, just read any book on the subject and pretend to be informed. I've got a library on the subject if you want to come over and borrow a book.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
ok wait a sec (2.00 / 3) (#317)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:19:11 PM EST

all this bitching and moaning and the guy wasn't that much older than you? Correct me if I'm mistaken but that would mean he was like no older than 12? Dude if you think a preteen circle jerk made you asexual you're definately mistaken.  I could see homophobic or something but let's be realistic here...

I had plenty of childhood sexual experiences myself and feel either neutral or positive about it. It's a tabboo topic but kids are sexual beings even if they've been seriously repressed or confused about it by a prudish upbringing..  they understand it in their own way, and get what they get out of it in their own way. I don't think I'm the exception but I vividly recall great enjoyment exploring girls bodies, even if i didn't understand everything, and a girl like 2 years older than me taught me how to masturbate and such. I defintale was around other guys too though we were both more interested in the girls, maybe if they weren't around we woulda done something who knows, it's hard to recall with great accuracy what I was thinking so long ago.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

That's not how it works, sparky (2.00 / 4) (#389)
by SocratesGhost on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 02:24:32 AM EST

not by a long shot. Try reading any books on the subject.

It's not that hard to run rings around a 12 year old and convince them that it was even their idea. Try it... actually, no, don't. I really don't think you of all people should.

First of all, you tell me that you were engaged sexually early on, and then you post diaries like this. I'd say we're both trapped, then by whatever metric you hold me to. I have the benefit of siding with those who had this perpetrated against them, while you want to support those who do the perpetrating. I side with caution, while you side with personal satisfaction no matter the cost, even ignoring the real damage that studies show, and which I note that you don't even try to dispute.

There is almost no study by someone who can dispassionately review the material who supports your position. Touching boobies is one thing. Being convinced by someone older than you that it's ok, that's something else. And there's a big difference between 4th grade and 8th, I'd add. If you can't see this difference, then perhaps you should, again, try reading someone who has dispassionately reviewed the effects. Seriously, don't take my word for it, but read those who would challenge your thoughts as I'm willing to read those who challenge mine.

I also want to stress that I don't think you're evil or anything, and I don't think that the poster of this article is evil either; I think people are conditioned by their environments and this can either help or hinder. I honestly believe that the author of this article is not really entirely in control of himself and just has an illusion of control, and I would discourage him from removing this self control from others. As I've pointed out elsewhere, it's no coincidence that his first sexual experience was with 10 or 11 year olds and that he now finds himself sexually attracted to... wait for it... 10 or 11 year olds. Note also how he doesn't say their age, only their grade.

The best proof of this lack of control is this: do you think it free will or destiny that a 10 year old would marry him when she's 19 or are you willing to admit that it's possible that his actions when she was 10 may have inhibited what choices she could have made?

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
wtf? (1.00 / 2) (#411)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 10:41:55 AM EST

not by a long shot. Try reading any books on the subject.

It's not that hard to run rings around a 12 year old and convince them that it was even their idea. Try it... actually, no, don't. I really don't think you of all people should.

Me of all people? What because I critisized Perverted Justice? OMG nobody watch the watchdogs!! Give me a break, I've repeatedly stated again and again that current CA statutory rape laws are perfectly fine and I see no need for reform (and we're 18 here not 16). Just because I can aknowledge that through a personal account and the account of dozens of others, childhood sexuality isn't a sure fire way to be emotionally crippled as an adult, and I have a high suspicion that it's fixated on because it's socially and scientificially acceptable to do so, and that furthermore humans irrationally fixating on something like that is a very common thing, and changes with social acceptability. If you're implying that I'm preoccupied with fantasies of underage women, it's not the case, though I am proccupied with the topic of pedophelia and child sexuality in western culture because I'm facinated by the hysteria towards it. Put into context of other less prude cultures where there's no need to pretend sex doesn't exist around children and you get much healthier attitudes and opinions about sex.  You claim my interest in the topic is a symptom of some illness which I don't believe I have. I say that claim is the very hysteria that fascinates me. And that hysteria is a symptom of a cultural sickness and emotional immaturity about sex.


First of all, you tell me that you were engaged sexually early on, and then you post diaries like this. I'd say we're both trapped, then by whatever metric you hold me to. I have the benefit of siding with those who had this perpetrated against them, while you want to support those who do the perpetrating.

If by side with the perpetuating you mean I hold no ill will to the underage girls that tempted my underage self then indeed you'd be correct. Even if I was fucked up over it (which you seem to think I am but I don't believe it to be true) I wouldn't hold anything against them. If you mean I side with criminal sex offenders then FUCK THAT. You can't equate my trying to dispell some of the hysteria as siding with criminals.


I side with caution, while you side with personal satisfaction no matter the cost, even ignoring the real damage that studies show, and which I note that you don't even try to dispute.

Of course I don't try to dispute it. Anybody who believes they're suffering from early childhood sexual experience or for that matter adult homosexual experience I will not dispute that. What's the point? Everybody is their own worse enemy when it comes to psychology, they can choose to be whatever victim they want. There's a point about the adult homosexuality i'd like to make very clear..  at one point the studies and general scientific wisdom was that homosexuality was a disease and every practitioner of homosexuality was suffering - now the studies show it's a normal variation in human sexuality and that homosexual people can live regular happy healthy lives. Even in the hard sciences: scientific had also proven flight impossible yet we now have airplanes and helicopters! Scientific studies aren't without merit but to blindly follow theories of soft science is only going to do you a disservice and intellectual inflexibility is infact not the way of science at all. But any study that says I'm wrong for being ok with my childhood sexuality and that personally I look back upon it as a natural thing is condescending and hostile to me.


There is almost no study by someone who can dispassionately review the material who supports your position. Touching boobies is one thing. Being convinced by someone older than you that it's ok, that's something else. And there's a big difference between 4th grade and 8th, I'd add. If you can't see this difference, then perhaps you should, again, try reading someone who has dispassionately reviewed the effects. Seriously, don't take my word for it, but read those who would challenge your thoughts as I'm willing to read those who challenge mine.

And just what position are you talking about, that there's a natural tendency for kids to be sexual in their own way? For boys to be interested and curious about girls and vice versa? First of all, this is an observation and a personal account and see no need for scientific proof but I could probably find some, and may do a short search for it. Curbing and repressing any natural curiosity about sex I believe does more damage to kids than the curiosity itself. To teach them shame for feeling that way because they're too young or because sex is inherently shameful is a far worse a pervasive problem in western society than "i'll show you mine if you show me yours."   Note this excludes adult child predators which I'm all for locking up.


I also want to stress that I don't think you're evil or anything, and I don't think that the poster of this article is evil either; I think people are conditioned by their environments and this can either help or hinder. I honestly believe that the author of this article is not really entirely in control of himself and just has an illusion of control, and I would discourage him from removing this self control from others. As I've pointed out elsewhere, it's no coincidence that his first sexual experience was with 10 or 11 year olds and that he now finds himself sexually attracted to... wait for it... 10 or 11 year olds. Note also how he doesn't say their age, only their grade.

I view the author of this article as having made a mistake and a criminal, and one I wouldn't mind seeing brought to justice when it happened, but believe an informal statute of limitation and the fact that they're engaged kinda makes him off the hook at this point, and I don't see him as somebody that preys on children's vulnerabilities but am very concerned about his attitude which makes me worried he might be a repeat offender, in that case, maybe being forced to register as a sex offender would be a good idea, i don't know how effective that actually is.


The best proof of this lack of control is this: do you think it free will or destiny that a 10 year old would marry him when she's 19 or are you willing to admit that it's possible that his actions when she was 10 may have inhibited what choices she could have made?

Heh is anything free will or destiny? Despite appearences I'm not god how can I know? Personally I don't think the marriage will last, no. I would believe she's too young and inexperienced to build a lasting marriage at this point, but that's just a guess who knows.  But yeah nobody I know who got married <= 20 (besides grandparents and others from the WWII era) had a lasting marriage.  Maybe when her marriage falls apart and her life goes to shit she'll have a sudden revelation that she was a victim of child sexual abuse? Who knows? At that point you'd have to admit or at least consider the timing was awfully convenient..  Uh oh... emotional turmoil, oh i know let's blame my childhood sexuality!

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

Talk about hysteria (2.50 / 1) (#435)
by SocratesGhost on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:29:40 PM EST

Have I used the word "sick" or "ill" about either of you? No. You're reading more into my response than I said. I called him "fucked up" but, well, a guy in an auto accident can get fucked up; that isn't a moral evaluation. If you read what I said, it is that we (this includes you) are conditioned by our experiences. I may be taking a hard stand by saying your early sexual experiences inform your opinions of child molestators (after all, we're talking about a 10 year old girls in this article so I'm assuming you're talking similarly, not merely consent between two 14 year olds), but I don't think it's an incredible limb to go out on.

Also, I'm not intimately familiar with your own history, but when you talk about underaged girls who tempted you are you talking about 12 year olds when you were 15, and are you willing to recognize the very real possibility that they may have been abused (studies range somewhere between 15 and 71% with a median at 32%)? My concern is whether some outside agency influenced these behaviors or whether it's the child themself who has this interest. Neither of us know in your own particular case (unless you know their case history) but the incidence of coitus in pre-adolescents is unheard of in normal development, and a 12 year old is in many ways pre-adolescent. After that age, though, the situation becomes much murkier and many other factors apply.

I guess my point is that you are associating me with repression and some warped views of sexuality when my interest is in making sure that those who get introduced to sexuality do so on equal footing because the evidence shows that this is the activity least likely to produce long term negative behaviors.

In the case of peadophilia, clinics define abusive behavior as occuring when there is a separation of 3 years or more. At that age difference, the older child is typically in a position of trust (babysitters) or is able to coerce or manipulate the younger child with relative ease. It's a two way street, too. The older child, who is attempting sex with a younger child typically has a history of abuse, and the younger child has an increased likelihood of behavioral problems.

Within similar age ranges, though, treatments are different because the nature of the activity is different (such as a parental notification when it's viewed as benign or more discussion and intervention when the activity turns aggressive). Exploration of others is natural in pre-teens, but imitating adult behavior is not typical in those who have never experienced abuse. Coitus, for example, is virtually unheard of when one or the other has never experienced abused.

As for this author, he is exhibiting some rather typical symptoms common to paedophiles, and we should ask whether this is healthy for him or others. Obviously, I suggest that it is not, but even in his own words he says that he relates to 10 year olds emotionally. Now, I don't know a 10 year old who I can talk to about my day at work, how my boss is an ass, how my water bill was too much, and, oh, yeah, I forgot to mention, can you provide the mature support for me; my mother just died. That kind of emotional support is just not possible, no matter how precocious the child; they just haven't had the experience to process 90% of that. That he relates so much with a 10 year old speaks volumes about his own emotional identity. Is that really healthy for him? And now that his own maturity shows signs of arrest, how well do you think he can support her emotionally? In his chances to attempt to justify himself (in my opinion), he could have argued that his activities benefitted the child. He does not. What he says is, "Isn't it a little arrogant of you to assume that someone who you don't know and have never met - someone you know NOTHING about - is incapable of deciding for herself whether or not she's being hurt?" In other words, he doesn't answer the question of "aren't you harming them?" At another point he says, "Kids don't have the mental capacity blah blah blah." to typify the health care argument. That "blah blah blah" tells me a lot about his concern for the child's mental health--that is, dismissively. His arguments are all self-centered and self-serving. How capable of a father do you think he'll make? How capable will his children be? That's the part that bothers me, because the statistics ain't so good for them.

Also, like I said, the incidence of divorce dramatically increases when one of the partners has a history of being abused as a child. I don't deal in single dimensional causes, so I tend to use the word "influences" but to me there is sexual activity that can happen early enough such that the adult will be incapable of doing what is necessary for a healthy marriage. I'm not trying to assign blame after the fact, but trying to improve the odds before the fact, and I suspect you'd be willing to agree with that. Why do we want to make marriage and emotional stability more difficult by being supportive of paedophilia? Do you really think they have a equal chance of everyone of "making it" and having a healthy mature relationship and capable of growing children who have healthy mature relationships? I think we both know that there are factors which make that less likely and I think we both know that it has it's source in their own development and experience.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
ok I shouldn't have read into your response (2.50 / 2) (#439)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:07:52 PM EST

but neither should you have mine.

Your info isn't really in harmony with my experience. True, there was hardly any interest at all in coitus but it did half sorta kinda as much as it coulda occured..  which i instigated, and i have never been abused by any adult, nor consider experimenting with peers abuse. It's hard to know exactly what I was thinking, i didn't really know much about sex or intercourse, but it just occured to me as appealing or fun or something, who knows.  While i instigated coitus i typically didn't instigate experimentation, that was mostly done by girls, who actually seem more interested in flaunting psuedo child sexuality then boys do, i think that might have to do with the media and gender role perception, i don't know. They seemed to enjoy sexual attention more than giving it, and I seemed to enjoy giving it more than receiving it. Some i'm realtively confident were never abused and others, who knows? As for ages. No I never was involved with a prepubescent after starting puberty, I always had a mental block about that.  I remember when I was thirteen an 11 year old girl was like wanting to start something and I was against it for that very reason.  But yeah I'd say between th ages of like 7-12 with other prepubscents within a 0-2 year age difference was my experience. After puberty it definately starts to become another issue entirely.

I would have to go back to read to be certain but I think you're reading into the author more than is fair. I didn't get the impression that he preferred child company to adults, or that they could replace adult company.  He merely stated that relating to kids can and is fulfilling. Many teachers, parents, and others who choose to be around kids are likely to agree. I havn't had super close relationships to kids as an adult yet but I do enjoy their company to a degree as well, as i'm sure most adults who aren't dead set on patronizing them and treating them like inferior babies. He mentioned connecting with kids on a level besides the adult/child roles.  That to me doesn't necessitate his being a mental child.

But anyway, cause and effect in psychology is very hard to study. Could it be that the increased incidence in prepubescent coitus go hand in hand with the other environmental conditions that are the true source of the social problems? Poverty, neglect, mental abuse, etc..

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

can they go hand in hand with other effects? Sure (2.33 / 3) (#451)
by SocratesGhost on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 02:02:49 PM EST

But do we see abnormal behavior absent all of the other factors? Absolutely.

One thing I will admit about the studies is that they frequently cite the need to do more research. The historical approach has been looking at it from the perspective of dealing with children who were abused. (Sidenote: I hate the word victim and survivor. They sounds like someone still clinging to the flotsam after the Titanic sank; I'd rather just deal in terms of histories and influences, but since there isn't a convenient word that describes these children, instead of constantly repeating "children who have experienced abuse", I may accidentally say "abuse survivors" but I really mean the former. Anyway...) Since the research began by examining abuse victims instead of societal norms, there may have been a alarmist bias about the effects of child abuse. That ended in the late 90s, though, when more thorough research techniques were introduced, including observations from teachers, surveys of children with normal development, etc. Still, the issues of privacy makes it difficult to speak with absolute certainty, but I really do think the jury is out on this one, that abuse does manifest itself in later behaviors. That's the accepted view and I've seen nothing which indicates otherwise.

Like I said, I really don't believe in single factors; the human mind is complex and some people will have a higher resilience to their experiences than the other. That's a key word: resilience. In other words, the expecation is that it will cause harm, and it's the exception that no harm will manifest. One study I read said that only 1 in 3 children who were abused will not show abnormal behavior; the rest will. Compared to the regular population, where only 6% of unmolested childred will experience abnormal behavior, this is pretty significant evidence that sexual abuse alone is the primary cause of abnormal sexual behavior.

As for the author, his behavior is common among paedophiles, I believe my assessment is sort of the clinical assessment but I'm not an expert and would welcome correction if I'm wrong. Still, the author says, "I am attracted emotionally, and (here's the rub) sexually to young girls." He equivocates on the age a bit, being attracted to girls who are "10.. 11" at one point and "grade 7 and 8" in another, but I don't know any 10 year olds in 7th grade... that would be 12 or 13. There's a pretty big difference there considering the age and I think he's trying to say that grade 4 is more or less the same as grade 8. In grade 11 (that would make him 17) he had sex with a 6th grader (she was 11). There's a game going on here with the author because he only mentions the grade when normal people would associate that grade level with sexual activity, but never mentions it when we would disagree. I'd ask this: was the 6th grader really initiating sex with the high school junior? I remember my junior year... I knew one good enough looking guy who only dated girls who were freshmen and I was able to see his technique in action: "hey baby, you're an adult right? I don't want to be with a child..." And they frequently consented, though I'd probably color it as borderline coercion. (one clinical example of coercion is the kid who always eats alone at lunch consenting to give sexual favors to another just so they have someone to hang with--the example I just gave follows a similar pattern though it's with older kids, but it's similar to the high-pressure marketing technique my classmate used to get fellated.) But 6th graders?

He also says she "in fact shares it [his condition] (though to a lesser extent)." Again, the evidence points to this being caused behavior but he's treating is as though she naturally was a paedophile before meeting a paedophile. What are the odds? More realistically, it's self-justification that he hasn't irreparably impaired her sexuality.

Further, "That is, I just liked to be with them, and talk to them. I felt bad when we were apart. Eventually I married one." I thought they were going to be married in a year? Still, primary relationships (girlfriends, wives) are supposed to satisfy needs. I like hanging around with children too because it's very carefree and innocent. I find my work with children very rewarding. Marrying one, though, that's saying that she satisfies his most critical needs, not just some supplementary ones that will come naturally with time when you have children of your own. "If you've never talked WITH a young person (as opposed to TO a young person), you won't understand." I'm sorry, talking "with" is associating and relating to the other person. Talking "to" is dictatorial. The Freudian in me wants to enjoy this slip, but I'll let it go for now. I still think the earlier line of his being emotionally attracted to 10 year olds says a lot of what he seeks (and needs) in an emotional relationship.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
Come on (2.25 / 4) (#265)
by nightfire on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:58:37 PM EST

Many children just want attention. Paedophiles teach them that they get that attention through sex.

Not that I'm arguing with you, but I would suggest that this is true for all people..

The child-adult relationship is one built on trust.

Again true for adult relationships as well.

Children need room to grow and mature before they can develop into people who are capable of making their own choices. When people interfere with that process, they interfere with the child's ability to make those choices, just as your own ability to control your actions were interupted when you were that age.

Well that's just ridiculous.  5-year-olds may choose to run into a street to see if they can beat the cars across, but that doesn't mean it's bad to interfere with the process.

m not sure if you see that, but you are just acting on something that was acted upon you. Because this happened to you, you find it natural, but this isn't because it was an innate desire in you. Your will, your personality, your desires, and your emotions were altered because of your experience and who you are is the result.

According to the article, he started it with the 2 girls.

In some ways, you're lucky you weren't introduced to heroin at 10. What makes this worse is that you find it acceptable to do this to others, to subvert their will before they developed a mature identity of their own.

Are you really comparing sex with heroin?

Anyway, I agree that subverting someone's will is horrible.  But again, according to the article that isn't what happened.

Whether or not he's being honest is another matter, though.

Depending on the age in which you interferred with their petri dish minds, it may be impossible for them to adjust.

But, according to the article, they're a well adjusted couple now (legal at least), on their way to getting married.  Did you read the article?

We are sexual creatures and it affects all departments in life, from how we relate to others to how we view ourselves. You might think it's within your rights to interfere that way, but fortunately society in this case truly understands that your ambivalence is a threat.

Jeez.

First of all, you just posted a contradiction.  If we're sexual creatures, then what's the big deal?

Second of all, what do you mean by "interfering?"  Was I interfering with my gf's in high school while I was growing up?

Thirdly, you might want to mention American society.  Not every society "truly understands" what you say.

When I was abused (by a fucked up person like you, I hope you don't mind me saying), it has taken me until now, some 20 years of failed relationships, frequent therapy, and months of reading later in order to begin to dream of having a healthy mature relationship with someone who is my equal. I'm 34, single, successful, and lonely as fuck because I cannot sustain a relationship. Is that what you wish upon others?

Again, according to the article he's in a healthy relationship, which has lasted apparently up to 8 years, leading to marriage.

I'm sorry that happened to you and you haven't been able to deal with it effectively.

Anyway, I pity you for not being capable of freeing yourself from the prison that someone else put you in. Thank you for writing, though, but truly seek help.

Look, I really don't want to be a dick, and it surprises me I'm defending this guy.

However, it seems to me that YOU are the one stuck in a prison.  He seems to be doing just fine.

[ Parent ]

development takes time (2.33 / 3) (#308)
by SocratesGhost on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:58:26 PM EST

Not that I'm arguing with you, but I would suggest that this is true for all people..

when you introduce sexuality to children when they are young, they haven't had the time to develop maturity in human relationships. They learn that sexuality is the mature relationship. It short cuts all of the emotional prep time that they need and odds are that they will acquire healthy emotional activity only with difficulty. You can try to say that adults have a hard time, sure, but they've had their chance (and I could argue that the chance was already taken from them, too, and this is why they are still immature, but neither of us have numbers to back this up one way or the other because what we're talking about here is very subjective).

Well that's just ridiculous. 5-year-olds may choose to run into a street to see if they can beat the cars across, but that doesn't mean it's bad to interfere with the process.

Except that you clearly know that stopping that 5 year old will benefit that child. What benefits does the child get from a young sexual experience?

According to the article, he started it with the 2 girls.

Let's do some math. They were in 5th grade. That makes them: 10 or 11. What age of girl does he like? 10 or 11. Most males have their first sexual experience by 16. Most males really like 16 year old girls. Seeing any patterns here? I'm only tangentially concerned about paedophilia; my main concern is childhood sexuality.

Are you really comparing sex with heroin?

No. I'm comparing the effects of underage sex with the effects of heroin.

Anyway, I agree that subverting someone's will is horrible. But again, according to the article that isn't what happened.

No, I don't think this article is seriously talking about the effect on children. It cites no studies, and only deals with it from his own point of view.

But, according to the article, they're a well adjusted couple now (legal at least), on their way to getting married. Did you read the article?

Let's hear her side of it and find out how well adjusted she is. I did read the article. I'm just skeptical. It's like asking the fox his opinion of foxes being in henhouses.

First of all, you just posted a contradiction. If we're sexual creatures, then what's the big deal?

The big deal is that because sex is so central to human life, causing harm in that area affects many others. Do it younger and the effects are more substantial. It's like messing up a foundation of the house. Before you can proceed, you should fix it. The problem is, most people cannot fix it easily because the rest of the house (the rest of our life experiences) were built on that faulty foundation.

Thirdly, you might want to mention American society.

Fair enough. I was meaning it in the sense of "the english speaking world" but as I don't know the laws in each country, I'm comfortable limiting it to the country in which he is posting, and from whom he takes his user name.

Again, according to the article he's in a healthy relationship, which has lasted apparently up to 8 years, leading to marriage.

Again, I'm skeptical. I've read too much on the effects of youth sexuality to trust it. It might work out, but I'd suggest that one of them is leading a less healthy life than they otherwise could have.

I think it's perfectly valid to be skeptical of my position, especially since I have an obvious bias which is one of the reasons I admitted it, so that others can judge the quality of my reply; I'm big on full disclosure. But I can tell you this: those who molested me weren't trying to do me harm, just as this guy isn't actively trying to harm children. Still, the harm just has a way of manifesting itself on its own whether its intended or not. For years, I put it behind me thinking that I was capable of dealing with life without assigning blame to my past, each day was mine to deal with, and for a long time was quite good at it. I ended up being very successful in almost every area that doesn't involve personal relationships. And every time I dated someone new, I find myself stymied again and again and again, letting myself be abused (because it's right to be exploited in a relationship, right?), lowering my standards to find love, acting out sexually to prove myself, questioning my own sexuality, and doing everything I can to sabotage a healthy relationship. Now, I take responsibility for my actions but those actions weren't uninfluenced and all of the studies about the topic validate this assessment.

I'm sorry that happened to you and you haven't been able to deal with it effectively.

Thank you. The only reason I'm taking time to comment at all is to say that no one should have to deal with it at all. Few people can. It's like an auto accident. Some will escape uninjured. Some won't escape at all. That's why we don't encourage them.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
You have a very twisted view (2.00 / 3) (#354)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:32:17 PM EST

of human sexuality and life in general.

when you introduce sexuality to children when they are young, they haven't had the time to develop maturity in human relationships. They learn that sexuality is the mature relationship. It short cuts all of the emotional prep time that they need and odds are that they will acquire healthy emotional activity only with difficulty.

This hasn't been my experience.

Though I suppose if you define "healthy" as "it fits in nicely within my view of the world" then I suppose you are right.

I think you may be an obsessive compulsive who would have fixated on something in any case, be it some traumatic event or otherwise.

Let it go.  You only live once, and you do not want to die alone.

[ Parent ]

I know (2.33 / 3) (#386)
by SocratesGhost on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:52:55 AM EST

it's only backed up by all of the latest research. My bad.

I define "healthy" as capable of making decisions which are in their own best interests. You're marrying a girl you've been grooming since she was 10. Why do you think it worked so well, because she chose you at 10? Seriously, what are the odds of that happening? It really must be destiny.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
Huh (3.00 / 2) (#328)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:02:18 PM EST

It sounds like you're the one in a prison.

I specifically wrote a FAQ point for you:

Q: I was raped when I was younger, and I blame it on you.

A: I'm sorry you went through that.  I hope you can heal.  Rape is one of the most inhumane acts that can happen.  However, our society has a twisted way of equating sex with rape.  Just because YOU don't approve of sex between people, does NOT mean they're raping each other.  So please don't blame me.  It isn't fair.

So please give it a rest.  And or gods sake get over it.  If you're still dwelling on something that happened to you that long ago, it's your own fucking fault.

Guess what.  My best friend was in a car accident and friend died when I was 13.  It took me a year to get over it, but eventually I did.  Find your own strength.

[ Parent ]

I wasn't raped (3.00 / 4) (#387)
by SocratesGhost on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:53:32 AM EST

point moot.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
His own fucking fault? (2.71 / 7) (#430)
by HollyHopDrive on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:59:39 AM EST

You would tell a rape victim (you thought he was one) to get over it and if he can't, it's his own fucking fault?

This colours everything you say about sexual ethics.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

And (1.66 / 3) (#437)
by SocratesGhost on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:39:26 PM EST

One of the generalizations that is true of most paedophiles is that they they lack genuine sympathy or compassion for others. This is a case in point.

He just equated someone else's fatal accident that he didn't witness to a victim's intentional abuse that was personally experienced.

Let's compare the key words.

victim's versus somebody else.
accident versus intentional abuse
non-witnessed versus personally experienced.

Other than that, maybe they are the same, but I doubt it.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
The ability to overcome (2.33 / 3) (#469)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:38:31 PM EST

past events that negatively effect a person ARE SOLELY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF SAID PERSON.

Example: you can't get over your psychological problems. That's your fault.
Hence the reason you're such a zealot when it comes to any issue like this.
.


[ Parent ]

right (2.20 / 5) (#478)
by SocratesGhost on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:51:09 PM EST

and the ability to recover from a bullet wound is solely the responsibility of the person shot.

-Soc
I drank what?


[ Parent ]
DUH YES (2.00 / 1) (#480)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:56:13 PM EST

I've been robbed buddy, so you're metaphor is completely defunct.

The guy was never caught, but I don't wake up in the middle of the night because, "OMG THE DRAMA, I COULD HAVE DIED, THE TRAUMA!!!!"

[ Parent ]

Isn't it so? $ (1.50 / 1) (#534)
by ionajn on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 09:07:25 AM EST



[ Parent ]
Well, you were the one who got shot (2.60 / 5) (#535)
by rusty on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 09:10:15 AM EST

I mean, it's a shame someone shot you, and I condemn them for it, but at this point it's been done, so it's time for you to get on your own feet and stop your bleeding and move on with your life, buddy. Pull that bullet out of yourself. If you can't even do that, well you deserve to bleed to death, right?

Seriously, I don't expect any more empathetic reasoning from someone who's proud that they are only as emotionally mature as an 11 year old. The chain of logic goes: "It's what makes me feel good, therefore it's ok, because it makes me feel good." Notably lacking in there is any consideration of other people. Hopefully this whole discussion is bringng that to the attention of readers who might not otherwise have realized it.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

His fiancee told me (1.50 / 2) (#546)
by HollyHopDrive on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 12:24:18 PM EST

"if you don't want to have sex, don't have sex, what's the big deal?"

I don't even know how to begin to explain why this doesn't cut it with ten-year-olds.

This guy thinks that because he did it and felt good, it must be all right and that marriage somehow covers up the crime. His fiancee thinks that the fact that she'd slept with more than one person by the age of 11 means she isn't in need of protection (I think it means she's fragile and damaged as all hell).

But even if we said that these two people are both fine and neither are damaged by this at all, the fact remains that the vast majority of 11-year-olds DO need protection and mustn't be given the responsibility of having to make a refusal clear. Everyone should simply stay away from them to begin with. There may be a few who go sexually frustrated for a few years (diddums) but there would be many more who would be prevented from suffering as SocratesGhost has suffered. And which is more important?

It is called communal responsibility. And it's not something we're going to see from someone who sees nothing wrong with having sex with children. After all, if they're not over it in 20 years, it's their fault. Just as it would be their fault if we made it legal and they didn't make it clear enough that they weren't ready.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

Serious question (1.50 / 1) (#562)
by nightfire on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 03:11:22 PM EST

If you're still watching this story, I'm curious if you could do me a favor.  It seems that while we generally agree on some things, we have such different outlooks on life it's remarkable.

I'd like you to rank the following situations in terms of the worst, to the least bad.  I need you to imagine it happening to your own child, or if it's too difficult, someone else's that you care about.

Just rewrite the list in the order you choose.

  1. Child loses favorite doll/blanket/possession
  2. Child loses parent in house fire
  3. Child has sex with child, is harmed
  4. Child struck by shrapnel in bombing raid or terrorist strike, loses eye
  5. Child burns to death in house fire
  6. Child in car accident, no deaths, no major injuries
  7. Child shot to death by insane person
  8. Child has sex with child, claims no harm done
  9. Child has sex with adult, is harmed
  10. Child suffers obesity and bullying at school
  11. Child has sex with adult, claims no harm done
  12. Child is violently raped by child
  13. Child is violently raped by adult
  14. Child loses leg on snowmobile accident
  15. Child sent to juvenile detention for sex with peer
  16. Parents sent to prison, losing custody of child, for not stopping his/her sex with peers

If anyone else would like to rank them, please feel free.

floridasun, if you would rank these it would be interesting too.

[ Parent ]

Okay I'll give it a spin. (2.00 / 1) (#565)
by kbudha on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 04:09:54 PM EST

You should do a diary on this.

Starting at worst.

5
7
2
16
4
14
13
12
9
3
10
15
11
8
6
1

[ Parent ]

I'm sorry, but (1.50 / 0) (#587)
by HollyHopDrive on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 04:44:27 AM EST

I really can't be bothered.

I don't know what the point of the exercise would be. If, however, you're trying to say that a child being murdered or dying in a fire is worse than being raped or having sex, that's entirely irrelevant. It doesn't make sex with children acceptable. What would a jury say if a child molester told it, "I could have killed her as well but I didn't. Aren't I a good boy?"

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

As usual you miss the point (2.50 / 2) (#591)
by kbudha on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 09:11:36 AM EST

He's wanting insight on your values.

Regardless of how you feel on irrelevancy, or how you're worried it might help the opposition's arguement(hence your jury comment), you do rank them as being more heinous than the next.
.

[ Parent ]

can't be bothered with careful self reflection? (1.00 / 3) (#592)
by balsamic vinigga on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 09:25:20 AM EST

Yes, I suppose not stopping to examine your values in ways or details you never have before is what let's us be hysterical to begin with.  God forbid you should lose some sense of hysteria.

It reminds me of people who wont play "Druthers."  You know that game where 2 or more people take turns asking them "if you had your druthers would you..."

"suck dick or donate 20,000 to charity of your choice..." etc..

Some uptight people refuse to play the game beacuse they want to say "neither"  well, of course neither, that's the whole point of the game! But when you stop and think about these things in detail you actually develop some insight into yourself, even if it is just a durnk party game.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

And I beg your forgiveness. (1.50 / 1) (#624)
by HollyHopDrive on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 04:16:22 AM EST

Please forgive me for the soulless, godless, unexamined existence I bear in which I decline to waste time answering pointless questions from people I don't know on subjects I consider irrelevant. We cannot all scale your giddying heights of moral introspection and ethical philosophising. Please forgive me, Father. It is Christmas, after all.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

That's too bad.. (1.50 / 0) (#600)
by nightfire on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 12:18:33 PM EST

I really would have liked to know.

Ah well.

[ Parent ]

Nice thread (2.50 / 2) (#593)
by bradasch on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 09:31:17 AM EST

Thanks for your comments on this thread - it seems you are very well informed about the issues and effects of early sexuality.

But IMO the main point of what you said is in your 2nd paragraph - "The child-adult relationship is one built on trust". When I read this article, all I could think about was the trust issue - once an adult becomes trustable to a child, it also becomes easy to manipulate the child's actions, so consent is a given. But, as cts pointed below, it's not "informed consent", and who knows what can happen then.

I believe that, emotionally speaking, sex at the early ages mentioned by the author cause much more damage than any kind of benefit. In general, 10 years old children are not sexually prepared - not phisically or emotionally.

Thanks for your insights - it's nice to see this kind or seriousness in this topic - trolling is too easy.

[ Parent ]

Not that I disagree with you (2.00 / 2) (#601)
by nightfire on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 12:25:52 PM EST

But IMO the main point of what you said is in your 2nd paragraph - "The child-adult relationship is one built on trust". When I read this article, all I could think about was the trust issue - once an adult becomes trustable to a child, it also becomes easy to manipulate the child's actions, so consent is a given. But, as cts pointed below, it's not "informed consent", and who knows what can happen then.

Not that I disagree with you, but this itself is equally true for children and adults.

You don't generally consent to sex as an adult if you don't trust the person, at least to some extent.

Sure kids are obviously more trusting and easier to manipulate, but using this as a primary means to differentiate is not safe.

I believe that, emotionally speaking, sex at the early ages mentioned by the author cause much more damage than any kind of benefit.

If he and her live their whole lives without regret, would this belief here change?

In general, 10 years old children are not sexually prepared - not phisically or emotionally.

I agree.

[ Parent ]

Adults are accountable (1.50 / 1) (#619)
by bradasch on Mon Dec 25, 2006 at 08:15:58 AM EST

"Not that I disagree with you, but this itself is equally true for children and adults."

Sure, but adults have enough time and experience to decide alone. Children look up to adults as role-models, pillars, so they can experience life and grow phisically and emotionally.

So when adults consent sex (even with people you don't trust), they have (or should have) enough tools to cope and deal with the consequences. Children don't, the consequences will need support from other adults, necessarily. Adults come with accountability, children don't.

Of course you can find examples of early age sex and no collateral damage, but these are exceptions, not the rule. It's not opinion, it's fact. As I said, at 10 years old, kids are not ready to have sex, phisically and emotionally.

[ Parent ]

you're being too kind (1.75 / 4) (#612)
by circletimessquare on Fri Dec 22, 2006 at 02:46:21 AM EST

the asshole is proud of himself

such person does not deserve obsequious level headed conversation

such a person deserves a boot in the face

there is the guy who steals to feed his family

then there is the guy who steals for the sheer pleasure of violation

at some point, guy #1 becomes guy #2, and understanding should be replaced with prosecution. understanding doesn't work anymore in reaching him. he's proud of himself. you can't reason with that. you can only punch that kind of perverse pride in the face

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]

I smell a rat... (2.72 / 11) (#228)
by ktakki on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:34:54 PM EST

Q: Where do you live? What's your IP?

A: In the US.
Poster claims to live in the US, but uses the UK spelling "paedophile".

I think it's Hulver.


k.
--
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people
are really good at heart." - Anne Frank

Funny. And it looks like its going to hit SP at (2.00 / 4) (#279)
by 1419 on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:15:58 PM EST

least. Yikes!

[ Parent ]
Hulver doesn't need a dupe account (2.57 / 7) (#299)
by Stjck on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:37:23 PM EST

Everyone already knows he's a kiddie fiddler.

[ Parent ]
Ok, here goes (2.75 / 8) (#230)
by admittedly dupe account on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:41:41 PM EST

I had to stop and think alot before posting and ven then I had to do it under another name because, well because.

I too would consider myself a paedophile.  I understand the feelings of the original poster.  I have never acted on these feelings in anyway that I consider harmful to another person.  In point of fact I stay away far far away from anyone under a legal age. I distance myself as much as humanly possible from any situation where I might offend.  I stay away from any situation where I might even be accused of offending.

I know I have this attraction.  I have always had it since I was young.  I liked seeing girls my own age in various states of undress until I was 14 or so.  After that well, my desires stayed at that 14 or less point.  Throughout much of my adult life I have satisfied my desires in a number of ways.  

The most satisfing has been to mostly date "small" women.  Mostly under 5 feet tall, with small chests.  It takes the edge off, it keeps the desires from growing absurdly out of control.

Young models also have helped me control the needs and desires.  I'd post more but my time is limited.

Asian women: a pedophile's legal outlet $ (2.28 / 7) (#231)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:44:18 PM EST



---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
Hey :) (2.33 / 3) (#329)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:10:57 PM EST

Thank you for posting this.

I'm reasonably certain that 1/4 the people reading this are shifting about restlessly because they feel the same way, even if they do their best to deny it.

It's funny you mentioned you knew it since you were young because I wasn't sure if this part was common.

Anyway there is beauty out there (close to) our age and one day you'll find it.  Just better not be my wifey. :D

Also small chix rock.  Especially u-15 japanese idols. :)

[ Parent ]

While it's good you avoid (none / 0) (#575)
by LilDebbie on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 05:32:51 PM EST

potentially difficult situations and employ other methods for dealing, you still should seriously consider therapy of some sort. I'm sorry to say I don't know how one would go about that, especially considering the sensitivity of the issue, but I imagine there are resources out there.

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
I myself (2.33 / 3) (#578)
by nightfire on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 06:33:26 PM EST

Would recommend against it.  You can never be sure that the therapist you talk to won't rat you out and make your life a living hell.  I've seen it happen.

This is one of the problems hysteria causes, and I guess it's something we'll have to live with.

[ Parent ]

so let me get this straight (2.87 / 8) (#232)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:54:19 PM EST

you are a pedophile.  an active one?  you currently pursue and engage children sexually?  
and you are marrying a woman who approves of this and you do not feel that you need help and you feel that it's society's views on pedophilia that are wrong.  
and your defense of that a child is not able to make such decisions for themselves is that adults are immature as well?  
and you are saying that there is no way to track the computer that you are using?   and to track you from here?  
and that you don't wish to have people critique your actions and your beliefs?
well, tell me this.  WHY did you post this then?  you want us to agree with you?  
you'd like the whole of or some of k5 stand up and say "hey, this guy's right, these laws against pedophilia are wrong and unfair?"  
is that what you were after?  don't look to me for that.  
as for you citing the study of mens' erections to being shown pictures of children, you are saying taht you think this should show that it's normal and healthy to engage a child sexually?  

sorry.  my feeling is that if there were a way to look up your ip and locate you and there were evidence of you actively engaging in pedophilia i'd look you up in a heartbeat  and i'd have you arrested.  

no. i'm not saying we should push it underground. (3.00 / 3) (#236)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:06:59 PM EST

where do you get that?  and he said quite clearly that he was not seeking help.  that he doesn't view it as having a problem in the first place.  

[ Parent ]
and we are discussing it (3.00 / 2) (#241)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:12:38 PM EST

did i say i wouldn't discuss it?  what i'm saying is that i view his behavior as criminal and deviant, not to mention illegal, and for the safety of others, he should be arrested.  that's my part of the discussion.  that's what i'm contributing to the discussion.  

[ Parent ]
no, he spoke (1.66 / 3) (#247)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:29:09 PM EST

he's allowed to speak again.  he can talk as much as he cares to.  i'm not stopping him from talking or expressing his opinions.  

you say he was willing to discuss this issue.  but to what ends? why does he want to discuss it? to have us agree with him? well, sorry, but i don't.  i'm telling him that.  i'm not blocking his right to speak.  i'm saying that he needs to be held accountable for his pedophelia.  not his speech.  

[ Parent ]

no, he can go to prison (2.25 / 4) (#251)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:41:39 PM EST

and he can still speak there and hold his opinions and whatever.  i'm not advocating he be kept from speaking, i'm advocating he be kept from committing a sexual act on a child.  

[ Parent ]
apparently it is- (1.33 / 3) (#255)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:45:56 PM EST

because you are still failing to understand what i'm saying.  
try this.  
substitute pedophilia with murder.
say he came on here and said "i'm going to talk about being a murderer"  
now, if in response i'd say "hey, talk all you want, but if i had a way to figure out where you are, i'd have you arrested"  would you still consider it to be me trying to keep him from talking?  


[ Parent ]
well, i'm sorry but (3.00 / 2) (#257)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:48:54 PM EST

i believe that you'd be wrong.  

i'm NOT inhibiting his freedom of speech. he can talk all he wants to.   he can blather on all day as far as i'm concerned.  i'm not inhibiting his freedom of speech.   i'm wishing there were a way to  inhibit his "freedom" to commit a crime against a child.

[ Parent ]

no, i'm not - (2.50 / 1) (#262)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:55:36 PM EST

we're talking about this right?  you and me and i'm not suggesting that because you are talking about it and have an opposing opinion to mine that you should be arrested, am i?  
instead, i'm suggesting that he should be arrested for pedophelia.   because he's committed the act of pedophilia.  

[ Parent ]
i'm not saying he should be tracked down for (2.00 / 2) (#266)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:02:07 PM EST

posting. i'm saying he should be tracked down because he committed and intends to continue to commit the act of pedophilia.  

cookie, i think YOU are the one who is not thinking.  

[ Parent ]

you are like the (2.50 / 2) (#271)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:07:19 PM EST

baldrson of pedophilia.

[ Parent ]
oh good grief (2.00 / 2) (#282)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:19:50 PM EST

   you think what you are saying is logical?  in any way?

and you know what?  i'll talk to you whenever i wish to in whatever way i wish to. ironic, taht your "answer" to this discussion is to say imply that i should only speak if you like what i say.  
anyway, i'll talk if and when i want to.  and say what i want, however i want.    

you are free to listen or not.  

[ Parent ]

no, i do not. (none / 1) (#286)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:22:21 PM EST



[ Parent ]
are you on drugs or something? (1.50 / 2) (#293)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:25:23 PM EST



[ Parent ]
No, just like page widening. \nt (2.33 / 3) (#298)
by student on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:35:15 PM EST



いいい
Simon's Rock College of Bard, a college for younger scholars.
[ Parent ]
well can we (none / 1) (#304)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:48:17 PM EST

take a break now?  i'd like to watch the colts and the bengels.

[ Parent ]
I think you're confusing her with dakini % (none / 0) (#456)
by Joe Sixpack on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 02:28:56 PM EST


---
[ MONKEY STEALS THE PEACH ]
[ Parent ]

ok well check it out (2.50 / 6) (#267)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:03:42 PM EST

it's possible the author is a troll and has never done anything. But even if everything he has said is true, 1. you can't be arrested for pedophelia, you can however be arrested for having sex with children. It's also worth noting that he never admited (though certainly) applied to commitng any such thing as an adult, and to bust him for something he did as a teen 8 years ago with his now adult lover is a little rediculous. The author was either very careful of not admitting to far worse or is actually innocent of far worse.

Perhaps the funniest thing is that if he's been in a relationship with her for 8 years from when she was 11 to 19, certainly nearly anybody who knew them knew about it but didn't find it important to bust em over it.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

all you say is true. (1.50 / 2) (#270)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:06:44 PM EST

i'm using the term incorrectly.  but my point still stands i believe.  that if he commits a sexual act on a child, he should be arrested.
and it has nothing to do with wanting to quash anyone's freedom of speech.  

and well as einstein said (roughly)   "all it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing"

[ Parent ]

I'm curious (3.00 / 3) (#272)
by nightfire on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:10:08 PM EST

If his wife refused to testify, on the grounds that she loved him and accepts his crime against her, would you support the state interfering to protect her?

If she refused to cooperate, would you support the state arresting her as well?

[ Parent ]

well at this point (none / 1) (#276)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:13:30 PM EST

she's an adult. so you can't really do anything.   but if she was still underage, you bet.  

[ Parent ]
well, even if they are not underage now, (1.50 / 1) (#280)
by dakini on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:17:18 PM EST

charges can still be drawn..

" May your vision be clear, your heart strong, and may you always follow your dreams."
[ Parent ]
hey cookie (1.66 / 3) (#283)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:21:14 PM EST

hey cookie.  
HEY cookie.
i'm talking to ya.

i'm talking to ya.  
hey look cookie, I'M talking to ya.  

[ Parent ]

cookie, i (none / 1) (#289)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:24:20 PM EST

was teasing ya.  ya goof.  
didn't you ever have brothers or sisters?
and play that game where you aren't supposed to cross the imaginary line down the middle of the car?

[ Parent ]
I for one can't think of a better way to spend (2.40 / 5) (#288)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:24:16 PM EST

tax payer's money...

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
i really can't either. (none / 1) (#474)
by wampswillion on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:44:43 PM EST



[ Parent ]
So you're OK with the crime? (2.00 / 2) (#295)
by nightfire on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:26:31 PM EST

Just let him go?  Too late, didn't catch em in time?

[ Parent ]
More specifically (2.71 / 7) (#297)
by nightfire on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:30:41 PM EST

She's a victim, right?  You're certain of this.

If she doesn't want to testify, she just doesn't know she's a victim.

Isn't that a good justification for arresting her?

A few months or years of therapy might be able to educate her about the fact that she's a victim.

Only a victim would refuse to testify against their spouse, and I'm sure that if she supports him, there could be some useful charge that could be levied against her.

Alternatively, we could bury her in the sand and stone her, for having sex outside of marriage.  That way God will know that she's there thanks to the merciful good graces of the people who care about her.

[ Parent ]

well you're too obviously (2.25 / 4) (#302)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:44:05 PM EST

baiting now.
but ok.   yes i see her as a victim.  but since she is of age, she now has the right to decide if she was a victim or not.  i don't like it.  because i think silence in the matter and her not knowing she is a victim and him not being held accountable, just sets things up for the next victim.
however.  without evidence you can prosecute. and she won't provide evidence.  

[ Parent ]
can't (none / 1) (#303)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:47:21 PM EST

that should read "can't prosecute"

[ Parent ]
I think I fear you more than him. (none / 1) (#355)
by nightfire on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:40:18 PM EST



[ Parent ]
and why would that be? (none / 0) (#470)
by wampswillion on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:40:19 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Because (none / 1) (#485)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 06:35:08 PM EST

Because while I don't approve of what he's done, the worst that can happen is he harms one person.

yes i see her as a victim.  but since she is of age, she now has the right to decide if she was a victim or not.  i don't like it.

This attitude led to most of the wars we've seen on this planet, the crusades, the drug war.

because i think silence in the matter and her not knowing she is a victim and him not being held accountable, just sets things up for the next victim.  however.  without evidence you can prosecute. and she won't provide evidence.

I just don't get this at all.  You are a victim, yourself.  There exists a person out there who believes that your rejection of their religion will condemn you to some specified fate.

What makes you so special that your judgment on whether someone is a victim or not is more important/relevant than how they feel about it?

What makes some religious fanatic less special?  Why are you not a victim of rejecting their religion, even though they think you are?

Again we know nothing about these people and it's totally possible they're disfunctional.

However I don't see how your interpretation is any more valid than their own.  And the same goes for me.  If she doesn't feel that she is a victim, I have no reason not to take this at anything less than face value.

[ Parent ]

i've re-read (1.00 / 2) (#500)
by wampswillion on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 07:36:31 PM EST

what you wrote here several times and i'm failing to follow your logic here.  

i'm saying that it IS her decision to decide if she's a victim as she is an adult.  

then i'm saying that my personal feeling is that i don't like that there is no other way to prosecute him, because i believe that means there is the liklihood that there will be another victim.  

am i judgmental?  is that what you are saying?  well sure.  everyone makes their own judgments about things all the time.  you're judging my statements as well.  so you are judgemental as well.   do i think being judgemental is a bad thing?  no.  not particularly.  i think it shows you have a brain.

perhaps what  you are saying is that you believe i'm condescending.  that i think i'm "better" than these people in some way.  and well, i know this much-  that i'm NOT a child molester.  so yeah, i do think i'm better.   does that make me a perfect person?  no, i'm far from.  and  you may label me as condescending if you like, i don't really care.  

what the hell does religious fanaticism or religion in any way have to do with ANY of this?  i am absolutely not following that at all.  

[ Parent ]

So now he can brainwash too? (none / 0) (#426)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:49:31 AM EST

She's an adult and if she feels now (as an adult) that no harm was done to her as a child then we have no choice but to let the whole issue go.

[ Parent ]
apparently he can (none / 1) (#472)
by wampswillion on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:43:25 PM EST

actually child molesters are really good at that.  they are known for their "grooming" skills, among other  things.  good at making their victims feel that everything is alright, when it is not.  manipulation.  

and no, we don't have a choice.  unless you personally want to look her up and try to talk some sense in to her.  but as i see it, since we can't identify and locate him or her, then that will be tough.  because without her testimony,  how could you prosecute?  


[ Parent ]

Okay (none / 1) (#479)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:53:36 PM EST

Since you're obviously without fault, how about a group of "concerned citizens" such as yourself look into every aspect of your life (past and present) so we can seek prosecution.

I can imagine the skeletons in the closet already.

And how do you know so much about child molesters (ie:grooming and manipulation)?
Had much practice?
.

[ Parent ]

i've worked with victims (1.00 / 1) (#503)
by wampswillion on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 07:52:55 PM EST

is what my experience with it is.  and families of victims.   i've personally known victims is also what my experience with it is.  i've read a geat deal aobut it and i've had courses and classes that have covered sexual molestation issues.  

as far as me being perfect?  hell no.  never said i was.  as far as "concerned citizens" tracking me down for anything i've done in my life-  well if there is anything on here that i've spoken about that you- all think is illegal, then have at it.  but i think all you are going to find is maybe some speeding tickets and some library fines.  and i've already paid for those.  
well ok.  i did drink before i became of age,  but i paid for that too.  also, while in college i did some drugs.   but i'm not sure you'd find any proof of that.  or that anyone would be interested.  they'd have to put way over half the people who went to college in my era away, if this were so.  
have i ever done anything hurtful to anyone?nothing that i haven't admitted to- to the injured party.  so there is not really anything you can hold over my head here.  

[ Parent ]

big difference between (1.50 / 1) (#532)
by kbudha on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 08:26:48 AM EST

child molestation- full grown man fingering a 8 year old

and

statutory rape- 13 year old girl who wants to explore her sexuality with a man. Parents wig out and press charges.
.

[ Parent ]

no, my opinion is that (1.00 / 2) (#561)
by wampswillion on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 02:58:38 PM EST

there is no difference.  

[ Parent ]
hypothetical (1.50 / 1) (#563)
by kbudha on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 03:47:29 PM EST

So to you:

18 year old sleeps with your 15 year old daughter

no different from

36 year old fondles your 10 year old daughter

[ Parent ]

this is an opinion. (1.50 / 2) (#487)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 06:40:20 PM EST

good at making their victims feel that everything is alright, when it is not.  manipulation.

This is an opinion.  I share it.

However, do not mistake it for fact.  They are entitled to their own opinion as well, regardless of how untenable we may find it.

[ Parent ]

absolutely (2.25 / 4) (#274)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:11:56 PM EST

I'd hate for him to continue to be an offender and get away with it.  Though as it stands from everything he wrote about, I wouldn't assemble a lynch mob.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
i never suggested a lynch mob (2.50 / 2) (#277)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:14:22 PM EST



[ Parent ]
er it's a common phrase which means (2.00 / 5) (#294)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:26:31 PM EST

taking action to persecute someone. Something as simple as your top comment is often referred to as "assembling a lynch mob"

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
you knew what i meant. (none / 1) (#296)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:29:47 PM EST



[ Parent ]
um (2.60 / 5) (#246)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:21:47 PM EST

what i'm saying is that i view his behavior as criminal and deviant, not to mention illegal,

um I think we are all in agreement here, the author included.

and for the safety of others, he should be arrested

I would agree here. If he were to convince me that his current partner was an isolated event that he now knows to be wrong. Yet despite this he's in a loving and commited relationship, and all is well then I'd say just leave it be.  But he seems to believe that it's perfectly fine, and that's scary, whether he intends to repeat his crime or not, he should have to pay for his past crimes since he doesn't seem to want to admit it was wrong.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

wow, you and me (1.66 / 3) (#248)
by wampswillion on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:29:58 PM EST

bv, we're agreeing.  who would have ever dreamed of that?

[ Parent ]
heh yeah well i just thought i'd say that (2.00 / 6) (#252)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:42:03 PM EST

because i've argued some hard things here somewhat in his defense and didn't want anybody to think i'm actually ok with it.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
YFI, actually wamps said the opposite (2.50 / 2) (#314)
by nostalgiphile on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:11:22 PM EST

she said she'd look him up and make his identity and professions of guilt public...which is quite the opposite of silencing the issue and pushing it underground.

"Depending on your perspective you are an optimist or a pessimist[,] and a hopeless one too." --trhurler
[ Parent ]
i totally agree with you wamps.. (1.33 / 3) (#275)
by dakini on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:11:56 PM EST



" May your vision be clear, your heart strong, and may you always follow your dreams."
[ Parent ]
i state my opinion on the subject..as i did (2.33 / 3) (#313)
by dakini on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:10:50 PM EST

before..this is a sickness..children should not be abused in this way..they cannot give an informed consent at the age of 11..and rationalizing all you want as a pedophile, does not cut it..it is against the law, both legal and moral laws of society..fantazising is one thing, but carrying it out is another and in my books not right..imho..so be it..

" May your vision be clear, your heart strong, and may you always follow your dreams."
[ Parent ]
I don't think (none / 0) (#357)
by nightfire on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:44:01 PM EST

I don't think anyone is arguing about the legality of it.

And there is no such thing as a "moral law."

Certainly what he did is highly unacceptable to most people.  I know how I feel about it..

And many people disagree with you about fantasizing being OK as well.  Care to justify that?

[ Parent ]

i did not say fantasizing was okay...but (1.00 / 0) (#367)
by dakini on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:04:35 AM EST

there is nothing that can be done because of ones thoughts, it is the acting out on those thoughts is the crime..and i do believe that there are "moral" laws..not in the legal sense by any means, but a morality we live by..

" May your vision be clear, your heart strong, and may you always follow your dreams."
[ Parent ]
But that's the problem (2.50 / 1) (#373)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:23:49 AM EST

It can't be a law if only some people accept it. :)

In theory laws are created to codify unacceptable behavior - something we can agree upon (or vote out).

Morals are merely our own internalization of what we think is right and wrong.  There can't be 2 punitive law systems, and there can't be a hundred million moral law systems.

Anyway I agree with you.  Thoughtcrime is more scary than anything else out there.

I just wanted to point out that you quite clearly said:

fantazising is one thing, but carrying it out is another and in my books not right

Implying that fantasizing is OK.  And while I agree with you, many people don't.

[ Parent ]

I thought you didn't want people to know your olde (2.00 / 1) (#454)
by Joe Sixpack on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 02:13:27 PM EST

r account?

---
[ MONKEY STEALS THE PEACH ]
[ Parent ]

What? (3.00 / 1) (#460)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 04:42:57 PM EST



[ Parent ]
You've read me % (none / 0) (#465)
by Joe Sixpack on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:13:05 PM EST


---
[ MONKEY STEALS THE PEACH ]
[ Parent ]

Ohhhh (2.33 / 6) (#235)
by SpaceMonkeyGrif on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:05:42 PM EST

"When my mom found out, however... it was not quite as wonderful.  She threatened to have her charged, and I threatened kill myself if she did.  Eventually she lost interest, but it was years before I saw my babysitter again."

There we had it... a turning point.  A chance to have you confront your demons early enough to catch them... <B>and your MOM fucking blew it.</B>

I have a feeling I will be talking to your daughter when she turns 11.    

You will be having kids, and most probably posting pictures of yourself violating them on the internet.

Do the world a favor, right now, and kill yourself.

You are too far gone... I've met too many like you.  

Heh when you believe that in 100% of the cases (2.25 / 4) (#242)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:15:55 PM EST

that childhood molestation is a horrible thing to have to suffer through, when you find a well adjusted person going about their life who had been molested testifying that infact the molestation was a positive event in their life, what can you do? When you believe something 100% there's no room for exceptions. Indeed the fact that they're happy with their life is a victim of their unaknowledged problem.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
er... symptom of their unaknowledged problem $ (3.00 / 3) (#244)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:17:05 PM EST



---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
Heh, standard manipulation technique (2.66 / 3) (#531)
by it certainly is on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 08:21:16 AM EST

To give an example from another field:
At a most fundamental level of thinking there are really just two alternative starting positions. One is characterised by the assumption that man can find out all that is true by careful enquiry; the other acknowledges the limitation of such endeavour and recognises the need for us to accept Divine help
Of all the persuading techniques and logical fallacies in the above quote, the one that strikes me as the worst is saying "recognises the need". He's stating that Divine Help is a "necessity" and that if you don't agree, it's because you haven't "recognised" that necessity. In other words, he thinks he has a monopoly hold on truth, so if you disagree with him you must be arguing from ignorance.

If you believe so strongly in something that evidence from someone else to the contrary makes you believe that they must be deluded or lying, it might be a sign that in fact you are the deluded person. This is why I think argument from belief has little merit, because beliefs can differ vastly between different people. Instead, arguing from fact is a far better approach.

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.
[ Parent ]

Fuck off (2.00 / 4) (#330)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:13:36 PM EST

Live your own life and leave us alone.

I'm sorry I haven't lived up to your expectation of a decent human being.

If you ever have kids, I hope they're as mainstream as you require them to be.

[ Parent ]

I admire the fact... (2.83 / 6) (#332)
by Stjck on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:22:35 PM EST

That you didn't even try and deny that you're going to post pictures of yourself violating your kids on the Internet. I for one look forward to these pictures and hope you get a mailing list setup soon. Unless your kids are ugly of course, then don't bother.

[ Parent ]
The comment did not deserve a response (2.00 / 2) (#338)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:40:16 PM EST

But since you're making an issue of it,

No, I do not plan to violate my kids and put their pictures on the internet.

[ Parent ]

So it will be a spur of the moment thing? [nt] (3.00 / 3) (#340)
by Stjck on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:44:01 PM EST



[ Parent ]
I bet he hasn't stopped beating his wife, either (3.00 / 2) (#365)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:01:17 AM EST


--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
like with his current one (2.40 / 5) (#380)
by livus on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:07:36 AM EST

 
he'll be trying to help them with their homework (which  will still be too difficult for him) and watching the simpsons togetherand it will "just happen."

God only knows what new level of meta the Simpsons will have reached by then.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]

So you admit (none / 0) (#550)
by kbudha on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 12:50:06 PM EST

to looking at kiddie porn?

Why the harsh tone? Shouldn't you two be brothers at arms?
.

[ Parent ]

Almost perfect reply (1.00 / 1) (#616)
by codejack on Sat Dec 23, 2006 at 08:20:29 AM EST

Although you should have stopped with "fuck off", as that's all the response that post warranted.


Please read before posting.

[ Parent ]
Another Q (2.16 / 6) (#301)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:43:03 PM EST

Does your wife ever abuse her power over you?

By that I mean something like "If you don't xyz I'll go to the authorities about you fucking me when i was 11 and how i'm all fucked up about it"

where xyz could be any number of:

give me the TV remote
buy me that Gucci purse I want
dump me
shut the fuck up about me being a manipulative twat

Personally I wouldn't want my woman to have that much dirt on me...

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!

Nope (3.00 / 3) (#331)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:22:02 PM EST

No.

She knows exactly what would happen, even if she said she was just joking around or refused to testify.. they wouldn't listen to her.

A few months after we started fooling around her parents figured it out, and she had a big argument with them.  They asked me to come over and talk to them, and they told me that if I got her in trouble with the law they'd never forgive me (it was actually illegal for her to have sex and she could be charged as well).

I told them I couldn't deal with that either, and that's when we decided to take a break.

We would still hang out but never alone, for almost a year.

She says that's when she realized, in the end, her feelings didn't really matter.

So no she doesn't even joke about it.

[ Parent ]

oh heh thanks for the insight eventhough (1.66 / 3) (#335)
by balsamic vinigga on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:29:27 PM EST

i wasn't expecting an answer, it was just kind of a bad joke is all.

Yeah that's one thing i figured out soon too that something like this you guys couldn't really keep secret and yet nobody like parents and friends felt the need to turn you over to the police or whatever, as most people thought that would be the greater evil.  I think this happens quite a lot, sort of a grassroots vigilante justice about the unforgiving laws i mean... I mean obviously any real child predator would get his ass busted if people found out, but people knew that what you guys had goin was legit..  as such I'm not out for your head like some around here are.

I still think it was poor decision and a mistake, but what do I know, I probably turned away the love of my life based on the fact that she was underage...

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

Yea :/ (none / 0) (#345)
by floridasun on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:59:30 PM EST

Maybe it was a mistake, maybe it wasn't... we're happy.

It wasn't like one day I said "ooh i'm gonna have sex with her"

We watched movies together, did homework (some of which was surprisingly difficult :) and used to sit out on the back of my dad's truck talking about stupid shit.

One day she came over just to hang out, and no one was home.  We were sitting on the couch in a blanket, watching simpsons, and at a funny part we started laughing so hard.  I fell back and she did with me, she looked into my eyes and we kissed.

At this point, what am I supposed to say?  Ew get off me?

How would that have been better?  I liked her and she liked me.

[ Parent ]

Pedo couple's life is full of little pleasures (none / 1) (#364)
by MotorMachineMercenary on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:59:57 PM EST

Isn't that special. That should be a fucking Onion story, not a real one.

--
Keep banging those rocks together, MMM!
- Kasreyn


[ Parent ]
surely there must have been a point though (1.50 / 2) (#366)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:03:58 AM EST

at which you had to make a decision to commit a crime or not. I've been in the exact situation and few times and chose not to continue...  part of it was the laws, but it was mostly the social stigma of it that worried me - and I hate having secrets.  You pedos have it rough in that regard.  But never was it because i thought the moment was wrong or that I would hurt her.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
ok. let me get this straight. (2.40 / 5) (#343)
by redqueen on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:49:42 PM EST

You are a pedo, attracted to 10 and 11 year olds. Yet, you are marrying a 19 year old. Well, most women are just that by 19 -- fully developed. So, pick a bizarre sexual tendency to troll with and stick with it!

If you are serious, I can tell you right now, your life is going to be fucked. Chances are you will molest your kids (male and female), they will go on to develop bizarre sexual tendencies at young ages as well, probably get in some trouble with the law at some point, hate you, continue this abusive cycle with their children and so on.

But yet, you are proud you are not "status quo."  Congratulations, you're a freak show!

Best "interesting female" (impersonator): redqueen. - sausalito

It's called statistics (2.00 / 3) (#524)
by cburke on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 03:21:33 AM EST

No it doesn't tell you what is going to happen in any particular case, but it does give you the gist of overall trends and probabilities, and it certainly tells you where to place your bets.

For example, it's completely unsurprising that the author had an underage sexual experience with an older person in a position of authority over them. Statistically it would be unusual if that wasn't the case.  If the author hadn't have mentioned anything yea or nay, it would have been pretty safe to assume that it had happened.

Similarly this kind of thing tends to be shared with the next generation.  That's just what the statistics say.

I'm not going to argue for locking anyone up on the basis of statistics, but acting like it isn't likely is just foolish.

[ Parent ]

Thank you. (1.50 / 1) (#573)
by redqueen on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 05:03:56 PM EST



Best "interesting female" (impersonator): redqueen. - sausalito
[ Parent ]
I for one (2.50 / 6) (#349)
by Mylakovich on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:15:53 PM EST

applaud Michael Crawford for having the courage to come clean like this.

oh that was too easy (2.00 / 3) (#356)
by the77x42 on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:41:01 PM EST

we were all thinking it, why did you have to go ahead and post it?


"We're not here to educate. We're here to point and laugh." - creature
"You have some pretty stupid ideas." - indubitable ‮

[ Parent ]
This article's score keeps getting 'younger' and (2.40 / 5) (#360)
by Brick Wall on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:52:55 PM EST

younger! Let's keep it legal, guys!
---
Some people say Beer is unnecessary, too. I don't believe either of them. - minerboy
FUCK YOU (2.00 / 9) (#362)
by the77x42 on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:53:51 PM EST

I'm sick of these 'coming-out' stories. Nobody cares about your life. The internet is turning into one giant self-masturbatory festival of whores who think that their idiosyncrasies are somehow meaningful to other people. They're not.

You want us to ask you questions about being a pedophile. Okay, umm.. "What's your favourite colour?" "Did you think 2001: A Space Odyssey was way ahead of it's time?" Wow, me too. Uh.. "Why can't you just shoot yourself and spare us all grief?"

Is this really a fucking story?

Hey, guess what... most of society thinks that having sex with kids is wrong. We feel angry. We feel even angrier if someone is fucking our own kids. Probably not as angry though as if someone is fucking our spouses. But we don't feel that angry when someone fucks a perfectly normal (i.e. not in a wheelchair -- that's just creepy) 19-year old who was just underage months ago. ISN'T THAT WEIRD??? HOLY FUCK I THINK I DESERVE THE NOBEL PRIZE FOR POINTING OUT AN INCONSISTENCY IN COMMON INTUITION.

Like I said, FUCK YOU.

I don't need to ask you questions. I don't need to hear about your life. I really don't fucking need to ask you questions about your life. I could care less if you fuck underage girls/boys/rodents.

If, however, you touch my kids, I will put a 2x4 through the back of your skull so fucking fast, your nympho wife will have to clean your polluted brain matter off the wall with a fire hose.


"We're not here to educate. We're here to point and laugh." - creature
"You have some pretty stupid ideas." - indubitable ‮

Uh.. (2.00 / 4) (#372)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:16:33 AM EST

I think the fact that YOU are responding to his story, and the fact that it has well over 300 comments speaks for itself.

[ Parent ]
I have a question (3.00 / 3) (#374)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:30:00 AM EST

I have long believed that there is a contradiction in Canada (and the US, and many western societies) wherein people <18 can be charged with a crime, but they can't vote.

In theory if you have the responsibility of following the law, you have the right to change it.  That's what a democracy is.

I was charged with underage drinking when I was 17.  It was only a minor offense, costing me $70.

But it destroyed my faith in the legal system, because it was explained to me like this:

"You're too young to know if you should be drinking or not.  You made a mistake; here's a ticket."

What the fuck?

If I'm too young to know any better, how am I responsible?

Anyway, it seems a little fucked that you can be expected to follow the law, and yet not allowed to challenge it democratically.

So here's the question:

Do you think the voting age should be lowered?  Why/why not?  If so, to what age?

I mean the age-old argument of "they're too young to understand" obviously doesn't resonate with you. :)  And anyway that argument (actually too naive/uninvolved) was used to deny women's voting rights for years..

Aside (2.80 / 5) (#383)
by kitten on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:33:06 AM EST

I was once in court for some minor traffic ticket. In most places in the US, this means you get to sit there for an hour or two and watch a bunch of other idiots try to argue their way out of a ticket using an incomprehensible series of gestures, unrelated paperwork, blueprints of the Kremlin, bus schedules, copies of the Magna Carta, diagrams of low orbital flight, Newton's second law of motion, and a picture of themselves in a zebra costume.

Anyway, the point is. The point is. I was sitting there and the judge called another defendant. This one was a young girl, I guess she was 18 or 19. Like most teenagers she had her parents with her for support and assistance. She and her parents approach the bench, and the judge read her charge, which was consumption of alcohol by a minor.

Judge asked her some question -- I couldn't hear what -- and the father started to answer. The judge said, and I'll never forget these words: "Sir, I appreciate the concern of the family, but legally speaking, she is an adult, so this has to come from her."

I couldn't believe the sheer stupidity of a system -- not to mention the judge -- that would declare someone a legal adult, able and required to represent themselves in a court of law, insisting they're responsible enough to make decisions about legal matters, but too young and immature to knock back a beer or two.

Absolutely fucking idiotic. Politicians who wonder why nobody respects the government should pay attention to this kind of crap.
mirrorshades radio - darkwave, synthpop, industrial, futurepop.
[ Parent ]
Yup (none / 1) (#384)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:38:11 AM EST

Especially damaging to teenagers who tend to have a more fuck-the-system attitude to begin with, and on top of this, face a system of hypocrisy.

Sadly I think the people who are the loudest about maintaining the status quo are also those with the most to lose if the voting age were lowered...

[ Parent ]

hmm, well we're talking about state legislation (none / 1) (#395)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 08:20:53 AM EST

but in CA that would be impossible unless she had had a birthday since the incident and was answering for a misdemeaner she commited as a legal minor (17).  It could be an infraction in GA in which case it would be ok to extend it to 21. But yeah if you were 18+ and ended up with a permanent criminal record for that, the law would get changed fast.

I think CA's justification for making it a misdemeaner is so that they can force you to go to a class about it or some bullshit.

Heh but anyway, conspicuous public consumption of alcohol is an infraction in a lot of places regardless of age, which is basicly what the vast majority of busted minors were doing.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

I think the UK's even sillier. (3.00 / 2) (#405)
by HollyHopDrive on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 09:47:07 AM EST

At 16 in this country, you can marry (with your parents' permission) but not buy alcohol for the wedding reception or your marital home. You can have sex, but you can't buy pornography to get you in the mood.

There's that few years at the end of puberty where it's difficult to decide where the legal cut-off point has to be, but there are a few contradictions that are just ridiculous.

You shouldn't blame the judge, though. His job is to apply the law, not change it as he sees fit. That's a job for politicians. Pressure them.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

Also, you can have sex at 16 (2.75 / 4) (#409)
by it certainly is on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 10:28:56 AM EST

but you can't film yourself having sex because that's producing child pornography.

Then there's the whole "you're old enough to give informed consent to heterosexual sex at age 16, but you'll still be a mongy idiot for another two years if you're gay".

Won't you think of the children? The terrorists will win if you don't.

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.
[ Parent ]

Well, same here, but (1.50 / 2) (#477)
by kitten on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:48:47 PM EST

I had a friend who got married at 20. She couldn't legally have wine at her own wedding reception. (She did anyway, of course -- it's not like the cops were there, and the bartenders weren't going to tell the bride she couldn't drink on her wedding night).

As for the judge, his job isn't to apply the law blindly. Many people will plead guilty because it's not worth fighting or they have no hope of winning a case, and the judge gets to make a discretionary call. Is this a first offense? Were there any extenuating circumstances? Is it the type of thing that's likely to happen again or was it just one of those random chance things? Does the person appear apologetic, or are they being defiant pricks? (Incidentally, this always makes me wonder why people show up to court looking like absolute slobs. I'm not saying you have to dress in your ballroom best, but if you want the judge to show any mercy, put some effort into it, people.)

In other words, when sentencing, he has a lot of leeway -- up to and including dismissing the charges altogether (at least in this state of the US, and most others). Nothing was stopping this twit from dismissing her charges either, but instead, he sentenced her, all the while blathering about how she was legally an adult. Idiotic.


mirrorshades radio - darkwave, synthpop, industrial, futurepop.
[ Parent ]
I can't see why they bother to bust people for (3.00 / 3) (#410)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 10:40:16 AM EST

underage drinking in the US. I think everyone knows you go to university and drink. In the US, though, the only legal people drinking would be seniors, right?

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

That's even more fucked up (3.00 / 1) (#441)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:29:10 PM EST

I always forget the drinking age is 21 in the US.  At least it's 18 in Quebec.

[ Parent ]
And Alberta. However, I never got carded until the (2.50 / 1) (#453)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 02:10:43 PM EST

day after I turned 19.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

Imperfect though it may be what else can we do? (1.00 / 2) (#399)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 08:49:28 AM EST

If you let anybody that's affected by laws vote then that would mean children of any age which is unacceptable.. A legal system where 6 year olds have a voice would be really hard to take seriously.

If you grant children immunity from laws which of course would also be unacceptable. Children could murder without legal consequence.

Besides, minors are already protected in ways adults aren't in the legal system.

However drafting criminal legislation targeting minors is a bit absurd, I admit. I mean it shouldn't be a crime for a minor to buy alcohol but should be a crime to sell to a minor..  and of course any form of minor consumption of alcohol laws are rediculous not to mention curfew laws.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

Well (none / 0) (#443)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:36:28 PM EST

If you let anybody that's affected by laws vote then that would mean children of any age which is unacceptable.. A legal system where 6 year olds have a voice would be really hard to take seriously.

But 6 year olds can't be charged with a crime... afaik.  So that's too low.

If you grant children immunity from laws which of course would also be unacceptable. Children could murder without legal consequence.

There's an age at which this isn't true.  An 18 month old can't be charged with murder.

All I'm saying is whatever age we choose to say "you can't be charged with any crime under this age" is the minimum voting age.

Sure, most people this age won't have any interest in politics and won't vote.

But the fact that as they grow up they'll realize "hey I can change the system" at least some percentage of them will try.  As opposed to some saying "wait... I have responsibility without representation.  Wtf."

Another issue is taxes.  As far as I know it's illegal to tax someone without allowing them fair representation.

You can be taxed at 16, but you can't vote at 16.  Illegal.

Then again, in the US you can lose your right to vote by committing a felony.  Also illegal, in my opinion; if you can't vote, why are you paying taxes?

[ Parent ]

Oh forgot to add this tidbit (2.25 / 4) (#401)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 08:56:29 AM EST

which you may or may not be aware of.

In the US the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 to justify drafting 18 year olds to war.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

so was drinking in michigan, (2.00 / 2) (#486)
by mikelist on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 06:35:19 PM EST

but voter apathy allowed the drinking age to return to 21, interesting correlation between compulsory service and drinking age.

[ Parent ]
hmm i wouldn't accept this as fact without (1.66 / 3) (#507)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 08:30:49 PM EST

confirming it but my grasp of history is as follows:

prior to the 70's voting and drinking were both limited to people 21 and older. Then when the 18 year olds in the armed forced issue came up, the majority of the states thought they should just lower the drinking age to 18 too.

However there was an increase in drunk driving fatalities and a ton of scientific studies came out about how children seem to be worse at ignoring their inhibitions about drunk driving as well as more impaired with the same level of intoxication, and states were urged morally and politically to raise the age back to 21. I think federal highway funding was a huge motivating factor, and some states did it more quickly than others, i think in NY it was 18 even into the 90's? But now I believe all 50 states have it set at 21 and the "experts" report annual lives saved in the triple digits.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

s/children/adults aged 18-21/ $ (1.00 / 2) (#508)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 08:32:14 PM EST



---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]
It's not about the drink (2.00 / 3) (#408)
by Stjck on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 10:14:29 AM EST

It's to keep stupid drunk kids off the street because some of us find it annoying having a group of them ruining the place. It's also illegal in bars because unlike the author of this story, it's really annoying to find out the girl you've been chatting up is just a kid. Because you don't understand this it proves that they were right that you are too young to know any better.

[ Parent ]
Right (3.00 / 1) (#445)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:41:03 PM EST

It's to keep stupid drunk kids off the street because some of us find it annoying having a group of them ruining the place. It's also illegal in bars because unlike the author of this story, it's really annoying to find out the girl you've been chatting up is just a kid. Because you don't understand this it proves that they were right that you are too young to know any better.

I think it should be illegal to, as a non-guardian, allow someone under 16 to drink.  I think it should be illegal to sell booze to someone under 16.

But these are laws against people who can vote, not laws against people who can't.

I am almost 30 years old, so I'll disregard your comment about my age.

The irony is I agree with you; we just have different approaches.

I believe it is unethical to maintain a voting age which exceeds the age at which you can be charged with a crime.

So, if we want to make it illegal to drink from 12-18, lower the voting age to 12.

Problem solved.

[ Parent ]

actually, the problem is that (none / 1) (#455)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 02:16:02 PM EST

socialism has corrupted our criminal law.  There are too many infractions and misdemeaners one can be charged with for harming only themselves. I understand that under common law prosecution needs to present a victim...  and as such most of the cases where uncle sam is playing daddy are illegal.  Goes to show how much we continue to lose touch with liberty.

I like criminal law being discovered under trials by old wise farts, and dislike criminal law being influenced by youths who doen't even understand law.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

Agreed, but (1.50 / 1) (#462)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 04:50:51 PM EST

socialism has corrupted our criminal law.  There are too many infractions and misdemeaners one can be charged with for harming only themselves. I understand that under common law prosecution needs to present a victim...  and as such most of the cases where uncle sam is playing daddy are illegal.  Goes to show how much we continue to lose touch with liberty.

Agreed.

I like criminal law being discovered under trials by old wise farts, and dislike criminal law being influenced by youths who doen't even understand law.

Why not both?  It's not like the majority of adults understand what they're voting for either.

At least this way, kids won't feel like they've been shafted by having to follow laws they can't influence (even if voter influence is small).

I think it would raise better adults.

[ Parent ]

I don't see the problem (2.66 / 3) (#516)
by khallow on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 12:31:31 AM EST

You're too young to be trusted, but old enough to know better.

Stating the obvious since 1969.
[ Parent ]

That wasn't really my point (1.50 / 1) (#517)
by nightfire on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 01:04:52 AM EST

It wasn't about drinking; I just used that as an example.

My problem is with the entire notion of forcing someone to follow a law that they have no say over.

I don't believe democracy has an implicit age limit.  Either you have the rights and the responsibilities under law, or you have neither.

This doesn't mean we raise or lower the drinking age.  It just means that IF you can be charged with a crime (ie. underage drinking) then you can also vote to change the law.

If you can't vote to change the law, then you can't be held responsible for a crime.

Which means that the voting age, in my opinion, should be set pretty low... because we can't have a bunch of 14 year olds running out smashing windows and stealing cars.

It's not that many kids would go out and vote, BUT at least when they grow up they'll recognize that YES they did have the right to vote for a law change, even if they didn't exercise it.

And I think that would lead to a whole lot more respect for the system.  At least it would have for me.

[ Parent ]

Oh, and also (2.00 / 2) (#377)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:44:09 AM EST

Although I don't approve of what you did, I guess my approval isn't really sought..

I haven't seen anyone else say it yet, so,

Congratulations on your accepted proposal.  May you live together in peace and happiness.

All I'll add is this (1.00 / 3) (#391)
by psychologist on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 03:34:00 AM EST

Girls at 16 are at their sexual prime. Any man who does not admit this is just lying to himself.

But also, girls at 16 are not at their sexual prime in all societies. In certain conditions, particularly when there is food scarcity because of overpopulation, women become more attractive. Western society is overpopulated, but food is not scarce, so this does not apply.

What do you mean by "sexual prime"? (2.00 / 2) (#403)
by HollyHopDrive on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 09:37:17 AM EST

Girls of 16 frequently have more difficult pregnancies and labours than those who are in their 20s. And the last report I read said that the 20s were when a woman's fertility peaked (although admittedly these reports all seem to say different things).

For whose benefit is a 16-year-old in her prime?

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

Perhaps he means (2.50 / 1) (#407)
by it certainly is on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 10:09:52 AM EST

"in their prime to begin having babies every 9 months until their menopause".

Both men and women are in their prime to start reproducing at the end of puberty. There's this notion that men are in their prime at 18 and women at 30-40, which is more a social rather than biological convention (for example, read this. Other animals are even better at reproducing than we are and start at our equivalent of about 3 years old. Bacteria are even quicker. After all, what is there to life but to survive and reproduce as often as possible? The earlier you start, the more offspring you can have before you die.

I have no idea of the veracity of it, but I keep hearing that the notion of "child brides" are only yucky today because the onset of puberty has shifted to later in life. Supposedly we have extended prepubesense by educating our children and not putting them to work in the fields every day, and it used to be the case thousands of years ago that puberty finished around age 14 (and dead of natural causes at 30) instead of 18-19 (and 70-80) as it is today.

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.
[ Parent ]

In their prime to begin having babies (2.50 / 1) (#421)
by HollyHopDrive on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:33:35 AM EST

or to have them?

I don't really understand how you can have a prime time to BEGIN. Once you start menstruating, you've begun fertility. Are you more fertile at 16 than 26? Are you more likely to have complications in pregnancy or labour at 16 than 26?

As for women having a prime in their 30s, most of the reports I've read on that mean women in their 30s report more satisfying sex than those in their teens and 20s. Not that that's the best time to be having children.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

Begin having babies = have babies. (2.50 / 2) (#436)
by it certainly is on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:35:22 PM EST

"Begin" just suggests "and then keep going" (compare "buy a house" and "begin buying houses").

Even though you can get pregnant from the onset of puberty, there's still plenty biological and hormonal growth going on and there's a likelyhood of a very young mother (under 14) giving birth to underweight children, but after that age it's plain sailing (with respect the mother's age, at least) until the menopause. It was previously thought that becoming a mother in old age was risky, but not anymore, it seems.

Women's "sexual prime" seems to me to be more cultural than biological, as the article I linked in the previous post suggests.

The "best time to be having children" is entirely subjective. Watching other successful animal species suggests "as soon as possible, and never stop", but that ignores human culture and technological advances. I guess the best answer is "when you are most able to financially and emotionally".

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.
[ Parent ]

The purpose of sex (2.50 / 2) (#446)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:46:33 PM EST

ceased to be defined by reproduction MANY MANY years ago.

Sex is NOT simply a tool to have babies.

I think most guys will agree (with a few exceptions, and a few liars) that women are the most attractive from 16-20 years old.

Certainly MTV would concur.

Culturally most women, as far as I have read, prefer men in their 30s, as they tend to be stronger financially and politically.

[ Parent ]

Which way around (3.00 / 1) (#525)
by Coryoth on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 04:02:02 AM EST

Does MTV concur with men, or do men concur with MTV? The reality is that standards of beauty are heavily culturally defined: depending on what the culture you are brought up in considers attractive, your own preferences vary. Sure the particularities of personal preferencefor each individual are informed by the happenstance of events in their life and to some extent genetics, but in general we are as much told what to think is attractive as we decide forn ourselves. The preference for 16-20 is a self enforcing cycle, a feeback loop where preference informs media and advertising, which informs preference.

[ Parent ]
Biologically speaking, (2.50 / 1) (#527)
by it certainly is on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 07:56:37 AM EST

sex is for reproduction, and there are whole load of instinctual positive feedback mechanisms in our brains to encourage us to have sex over and over again.

What the evolutionary process didn't realise was that we naughty humans would trick our instinctual mechanisms into getting the rewards without actually having sex. So now we use our sex-encouraging instincts for nearly everything, from pornography to selling cars. Welcome to the sexy funtime that is the 2000s.

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.
[ Parent ]

Puberty is earlier today (2.33 / 3) (#440)
by StewedSquirrels on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:08:24 PM EST

Because of many reasons (increased nutrition, increased hormones, increased stress, etc), kids today are beginning puberty at the average age of 11.1.   Five hundred years ago, kids began puberty at the average age of 14.2.

Average age of marraige five hundred years ago was 16.1, which is less than 2 years from the beginning of puberty.  Physically and biologically, this corresponds to the age of approximately 13.0 today.

Today, sex with a kid aged "I'll be thirteen in a week" would be regarded as causing "pervasive harm" whereas for the last oh... say.... 150,000 years (until about 80 years ago) it was the biologcal norm.

interesting...  not conclusive...  in fact, it doesn't really say anything because society is different now than it ever was and it is conceivable that we were all wrong for 150,000 some years and are just now correcting that.

It is conceivable that we are all wrong today....  hmmm


[ Parent ]

I like these arguments (3.00 / 1) (#442)
by balsamic vinigga on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:33:23 PM EST

as it welcomes people attracted to jailbait into the human race, but dislike them as an excuse for not controlling such attraction or when it implies that society is what's broken.

But society can't be broken! social systems are like ecosystems, they ficilitate good and bad (relative to any one set of morality) and create an equilibrium that's dynamic and constantly changing/evolving.  Which is why I'm fine with the moral relativity of this issue and all others. In societies where it's ok, great whatever..  in societies where they lock you up then control yourself for fucks sake.

---
Please help fund a Filipino Horror Movie. It's been in limbo since 2007 due to lack of funding. Please donate today!
[ Parent ]

From a personal liberty point of view (2.50 / 0) (#554)
by StewedSquirrels on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 01:05:19 PM EST

From the "survival of your species" point of view, this is great...  the strong survive, have lots of babies... in that sense, the guy who gets to the girl first has the best chance of spreading his seed.

Unfortunately, our modern societies no longer conform to the traditional rules of "strongest reproduce" which govern "natural selection" at least as far as the past few million years would dictate.

The industrial revolution (mostly) and the iron age (to some extent) brought about a change in our evolution such that people who are smartest and strongest recognize that for their own personal well-being, they do not need to procreate excessively.   Only those with fewer skills and lower intelligence tend to creat dozens of offspring and because of a peculiar thing we call "sympathy" or "humanity", we aid them in that and protect their offspring to continue the genes of the morons who can't (or won't) understand birth control, while doctors, football players and physicists (smartest and strongest) often have no children.

So in one sense, there is no such thing as a "good" society because it doesn't matter one way or the other... society just "is"... but as intelligent people, we have an aptitude and a desire to discuss our societies and try to make changes to them.

Democracy is not a given... in fact, in the sense of the effort required to maintain it, it is a bit of "the long way" to ordering your society, but it is the one we have decided promotes the most social liberty, within the context of our constitution.

I don't think our current government is the end-all.  Every few hundred years, a new system takes the forefront of human thinking.  Democracy worked great for awhile in Rome, until it turned to an Empire in the guise of military necessity.  Frankly, that worked for them for awhile, until the Emperors became corrupt and detached and then it was taken over by tribal people who reinstated a sort of base feudalism, when lead into monarchy in Europe, which transformed into democracy and the cycle will continue.  I have no doubt that current democracies may begin to look more like Empires in the future... it seems to be human nature to grasp at ideals and ignore our failings.

hmm that's quite a rant.  I'm done.  :-)

[ Parent ]

My favorite quote is (none / 0) (#447)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:49:35 PM EST

"If we had all these quirky little hangups about sex 5000 years ago, we wouldn't be here as a species to fret over it."

[ Parent ]
150,000 (2.00 / 1) (#536)
by Sgt York on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 09:51:03 AM EST

years ago it was also perfectly acceptable to smack someone over the head with a rock because you wanted their hand axe. But that's hyperbole, and you did allude to it.

The main difference is that although physical puberty may be hastened, mental development is not. 150k years ago, a 13 year old would not be a kid, but a contributing member of society. He would be hunting and she would be gathering. A 13 year old of that time period would normally be self-sufficient within their society. In contrast, a 13 year old today is not self sufficient in today's society. I have met a few that could possibly survive on their own, but I have never met a kid that age that would thrive if suddenly left to their own devices. I'm sure a few exist, but today that would be the exception.

Simply put, 150k years ago we'd be making jokes about being 17 and still living with your parents.

There is a reason for everything. Sometimes, that reason just sucks.
[ Parent ]

Biological vs social (2.00 / 1) (#551)
by StewedSquirrels on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 12:52:56 PM EST

Agreed.

But that argument flies in the face of the common notion of a biological limit on decision making... where a young teen is simply biologically incapable of making rational decisions...

There is some rationale to saying that biology holds some indicator toward decision making ability, but the growth and development of that ability spikes dramatically between the age of 2 and 6 and begins to taper off by the age of 10 or 12.  Yes, there are noticable changes into the late 20s...  but does that dictate the current political and social beliefs?

Just a question, not a conclusion - take it for what it's worth.

[ Parent ]

I think (2.00 / 1) (#558)
by Sgt York on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 01:40:41 PM EST

that the biological limit is in the rate at which we can assimilate information. A person can only take in a certain quantity of information per unit time. If they exceed that, they just don't learn anything.

As a consequence, today's much more complex society takes a lot longer to learn. Add on top of that the intellectual knowledge required today as compared to 150k years ago. It's not that a 12 year old is biologically incapable of making the decision, it's that that person has not had enough time to accumulate the knowledge required to make that decision properly. I suppose that if we focused on teaching kids the specific knowledge required for making sexual decisions it could be done, but IMHO there are much more important things to focus that kind of effort on, even if that kind of focus is desireable for any subject.

Sure, a girl is biologically capable of breeding at the age of 13. A boy is biologically capable of breeding at about the same age, maybe a little older. They are not, however, as a general rule, socially mature; and that's really the point. Few people are concerned with the physical or biological damage associated with pedophilia.

There is a reason for everything. Sometimes, that reason just sucks.
[ Parent ]

What's the best thing about fucking 19 year olds? (2.60 / 5) (#415)
by it certainly is on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:19:37 AM EST

There are 19 of them.

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.

+5 Insightful (2.00 / 1) (#459)
by givemegmail111 on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 04:08:11 PM EST



--
McDonalds: i'm lovin' it
Start your day tastefully with a Sausage, Egg & Cheese McGriddle, only at McDonalds.
Rusty fix my sig, dammit!
[ Parent ]
I do have a genuine question (2.50 / 2) (#423)
by it certainly is on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:35:08 AM EST

Have you seen the film Hard Candy, and, if so, what did you think of it?

kur0shin.org -- it certainly is

Godwin's law [...] is impossible to violate except with an infinitely long thread that doesn't mention nazis.

How old were you when your wife was 11? (none / 1) (#425)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 11:43:41 AM EST



Regarding abusers seeking power... statistics, etc (2.50 / 4) (#438)
by StewedSquirrels on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 12:49:07 PM EST

A number of people in this thread have suggested that abusers are more interested in power vs love.  In addition, a number of comments have alluded to the idea that all abuse is inherently devistating to the 'victim'.  Let me address these two things seperately.  I am an outside viewer who wrote some papers in grad school about the topic from a media slant so I would regard myself more knowledgable about the topic than most people.  I'm also an ardent libertarian (some people also call me a moral relativist) so I tend to reject social stigma on premise, in favor of firm research and judgements based on relative individual benefit.  

To continue...

From my reading, there are two types of 'abusers'.

One is a situational abuser, who may not normally be attracted to kids, but is in a bad situation, or is somewhat mentally unstable.  He has a 'trigger', whether it be emotional or environmental, that makes him desperate for power and seek that with a child.  These invariably involve psychological or physical force and are destined to cause great harm to the kids involved.

The second kind is referred to as a "preferential" abuser (aka pedophile) who is actually attracted to kids for their childlike nature and/or physical features.  Fred Berlin's research indicates these are usually non-forced "simple consent" encounters (not addressing the "informed consent" issue) and have much lower coorilation with psychological harm.

So on the most base level, what floridasun is doing is unconsciously rejecting the first category and proclaiming himself in the second category.  Anicdotal research (Sandfordt 92, Levine 01) and isolated statistical studies (Rind 99, Bauserman 98, Money 85) suggests there is a non-trivial likleyhood (up to 50% in some studies) of these relationships resulting in a "net positive" outcome for the "victim's" psychological adjustment.  

Other studies refute this (Finklehor 89, Irving 96), and the data is often taken from the same sources.  However, studies in this area are almost always funded or overseen by someone with a vested interest in the results (Finkelhor is the chair of a child-protection agency), so it is clear the truth probably lies somewhere in between the two, leading me to believe that there is a non-trivial  (but not extremely reliable) possibility that some relationships result in a net-positive outcome, while many result in a net-negative outcome.

Frankly, determining WHAT circumstances result in this would be of great value to society, but people are too caught up in their moral indignation and concerns of the "public policy implications" of this science to even be willing to sit down and draft such a study.

Social acceptance (2.33 / 3) (#448)
by nightfire on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 01:57:34 PM EST

On top of everything else which I won't comment on, social acceptance would mean one less group of people to publically fear and ridicule, which is counterproductive for church and government.

They already lost their homosexuals.  I doubt anyone is going to cooperate regardless of how many studies are conducted.

How else are you supposed to pass draconian legislation without at least one universally hated group?

[ Parent ]

What metric are you using (2.00 / 0) (#571)
by LilDebbie on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 04:54:00 PM EST

for "psychological adjustment"?

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
MMPI (1.50 / 1) (#622)
by StewedSquirrels on Tue Dec 26, 2006 at 02:21:23 PM EST

I believe the commonly accepted baseline of psychological adjustment is the MMPI, (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Index).

It is what is commonly used in most research regarding personality and social disorders and social adjustment.

It takes into account both social standing and general happiness, psychological and sexual relationships and the person's own view of their relationships and adjustment, along with external indicators such as drug abuse and other mental disorders.

It's pretty well accepted amongst psychology researchers.

Then again, some studies use self-report only...  ironically, these show very similar rates of maladjustment.

One study sought to compare the MMPI results for people who suffered sexual, emotional, or physical abuse as a child (or any combination).

The highest indicator of maladjustment came from the group who had all three.   The next highest came from the group who had both physical abuse and emotional abuse.   The group that had ONLY sexual abuse (no physical, or emotional abuse) showed a very small (near zero) coorilation with psychological maladjustment.

What sexual abuse did do, is make the maladjustment from other kinds of abuse more severe.  For example, when a child was physically abused, adding sexual abuse to that made a BIG leap.   Whereas, sexual abuse by itself had relatively little effect.

The conslusion....  all abuse CAN be harmful.  Sexual abuse is not especially so by itself, and in fact, is more than likely LESS harmful, however it can strong contributor to harm in the case of multiple forms of abuse.

These sorts of studies are VERY important to understanding the issue and properly treating people who are having trouble because of them.

However, the kind of knee-jerk reactions that we have today... PLUS the refusal to address the REAL issues surrounding abuse, are not only harming kids but harming society as a whole.

Stew

[ Parent ]

ror YHBT all of u morons (1.33 / 3) (#452)
by cDiss on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 02:10:00 PM EST



ror YFI (1.50 / 1) (#475)
by kbudha on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:46:08 PM EST

HIREZ PICS PLZ OR STFU

[ Parent ]
Mental Capacity (2.25 / 4) (#467)
by levlafayette on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 05:29:15 PM EST

Q: Kids don't have the mental capacity blah blah blah.

A: Neither do most adults (yes I've had several adult gfs).

AFIAK Children (perhaps not "gifted children") do not have the capacity to engage in formal cognitive operations (Piaget) or post-conventional moral reasoning (Kohlberg).

Now, it's not as if adults (and by adult I mean the literal sense, "post-pubescent") engage in this either. However they do have the capacity even if (as Kohlberg suggested) they don't use it due to the social environment.

In any case, based on your answer it would seem that you are arguing that children are "off limits" as are most adults. That's an argument I would find it hard to disagree with.

Tell us in ten years (1.50 / 4) (#533)
by ppilot on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 08:46:41 AM EST

If K5 still exists that is.  Ten years from now, tell us about how your marriage ended (because it will.)

NAMBLA etc, why not? (2.50 / 4) (#541)
by tert on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 12:00:34 PM EST

Let me start with myself, since that's easiest.  My parents were very reserved Catholics when I was little.  They didn't like to express affection.  They're kind of archetypical awkward nerds, really.  My parents were divorced and when I was 7 I lived with my mother for the first time since I was little, and I noticed that she was very uncomfortable with me being nude (for example when bathing).  Kids tend to be astoundingly innocent about such things, and this idea that there is something unwholesome to nudity or affection left a strong imprint on my mind.  Which is to say, in my adult life I have all sorts of intimacy issues and so on.  It's easy for me to see that my views on human relations are warped in an unhealthy way because of my childhood, though it's hard for me to see alternatives.

It is from this perspective that I find NAMBLA's percepts fascinating.  I'm not particularly into man-boy sex.  In fact it "creeps me out" a little when older men make moves on me (I'm now in my twenties, and it's happened to me maybe 3 times, never in a way I would actually consider inappropriate), though it doesn't really offend me.  And so far as I know, little boys don't turn me on at all.  But nonetheless, the idea is intriguing.  Once you assume that we grew up in a sexually dysfunctional society, you have to consider all of the alternatives, and NAMBLA is certainly one of them.  I grew up with completely stand-offish closed male role models, and the fact that the opposite experience is possible naturally makes me curious.

More generally, I wonder about other societies where any number of permutations may occur.  Everything from openness about masturbation to boy-girl to man-boy to man-girl to incest could exist out there in the open in a stable society, it seems to me.  But I don't happen to know of any cultures that embrace anything really all that different from American puritanicalism.

Which brings me to my question: Why do you think that is so?  Why are societies which embrace such radically different roles of sex in childhood not very prevalent today?  I have a vague idea that several African cultures practice various sex acts with children, but these cultures seem even more dysfunctional to me (genital mutilation, inability to grasp the concept of HIV, the use of sand in intercourse).  Is this due entirely to my warped perspective?

At any rate, thanks for bringing this up.  It takes some balls.  And if I ever have a daughter I think I would thank you kindly for staying away from her, but don't take it personally alright :)

p.s., I've been reading k5 almost since the start and /. since like 1997 and I've never heard of 4chan until today.



Interesting (2.00 / 3) (#549)
by StewedSquirrels on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 12:47:46 PM EST

Wow, what an interesting post.

You haven't done anything but ask questions from a value-neutral standpoint, but you are already probably causing a number of people a great deal of discomfort simply because you are willing to look at the idea of discussing the topic (without even a hint of actually concluding that you support it).

I think the two classical examples of "successful" and stable societies that integrated pedos into their fabric, and in some sense, regarded that sort of relationship as "expected" within a well defined social construct are classical Greece (specifically Athens, Marathon, Sparta and that area) and classical Samurai culture in Japan.

There was a more limited quiet acceptance during the Roman democracy (before Christianity and Empire building dominated their political landscape and led to their downfall), the renaissance and in classical Europe, but it was done outside of the construct of the church, which overtly condemned all sex outside marriage (though often looked the other way for political and social reasons).

Famous folks who were either pedos or were on the other end of that sort of arrangement include Socrates, Aristotle, Roman Emperor Hadrian, and more recently, Donatello is among those rumored.  Not to mention Zeus in classical mythology (having courted Ganymede).

However, there are fewer examples actually present since the rise of Christianity.  Whether that is coincidence related to some higher understanding of our human nature, or whether it's an outcropping of Judeo-Christian hegemony over global morality is a question that cannot be answered.

Maybe it's a little of both?

[ Parent ]

Japan (2.50 / 1) (#560)
by nightfire on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 02:36:31 PM EST

[i]I think the two classical examples of "successful" and stable societies that integrated pedos into their fabric, and in some sense, regarded that sort of relationship as "expected" within a well defined social construct are classical Greece (specifically Athens, Marathon, Sparta and that area) and classical Samurai culture in Japan.[/i]

Actually Japan is still very much this way.

I have a number of Japanese friends who grew up there and moved here as adults, and, as I'm fascinated by their culture, the topic has come up.

For better or worse (who am I to judge), they seem to be westernizing, including developing the underpinnings of hysteria over there.  But for today anyway Japanese are much more tolerant than we are here.

[ Parent ]

Tolerant of what. 50% of Japansese people also (2.50 / 1) (#590)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 07:21:03 AM EST

think torture is a completely acceptable way to extract info.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

So do Americans and Israelis (2.00 / 1) (#598)
by nightfire on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 12:12:22 PM EST

What's your point?

[ Parent ]
Citation? (2.00 / 1) (#577)
by tert on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 05:57:16 PM EST

Can you recommend a book (or xyz) that describes any of these societies' traditions/etc?  I've heard a lot of references to Greek sexuality, but I've never read any detailed accounts.

About my disposition on the subject...I've had a lot of difficulty figuring out my own sexual role/gender identity, and I haven't had a lot of success discovering good answers.  All this effort, and yet in the grand scheme of things I'm really relatively vanilla (mostly hetero, into adults, and so on).  So it is pretty easy for me to look at other people involved in this same struggle and recognize our points of similarity over our points of difference.  I once got into an argument with a manhating dyke because she thought that if you just added a couple _B_isexual, _T_ransgender, _X_blah onto the end of GLB then you'd have enumerated every worthwhile group that is subject to persecution, while it was my viewpoint that even making such a list pigeon-holed people unnecessarily.  All in all, she's just another brick in the wall.

I wonder if K5 allows comment links.  This Esquire story really is central to the issue.  Read it!  It is a story of a genetically abnormal (XXY?) "man" who grows up to be both a respected (though aloof) community icon by day and a vicious rapist/murderer of teenaged boys by night.  In general I consider myself very supportive of this sort of queer, but obviously I don't support rape.  And I ask myself, how does a harmless freak turn into an abusive maniac?  I figure in Lindwall's case, it was because at some point in his childhood, his development became arrested (or forked).  His "true sexual identity" was completely isolated from reality.  His day-to-day life as a "regular man" was a complete fabrication, so the sort of day-to-day morality that most of us take for granted didn't have the same meaning to him that it does to you and me.

It seems to me that if Lindwall's daily experience included some sort of affirmation of his gender identity -- if even a tiny subset of his social contacts was even aware of who he really was -- then he would not have had to resort to pathological behaviour in order to express himself.  I literally think that if he'd had simply a chatroom on the internet where he could have talked with other people who are struggling with "the gender question," he would not have committed any sex crimes.

So I hope it is with floridasun.  So far as we've been told, his behaviour is really not that aberrant.  I'd imagine he jerks it to child porn.  When he was a teenager he had sex with pre-teens.  This seems a little disgusting to some of us, but historically it is really very (very very!) common.  It sounds like he's going to marry his highschool sweetheart!  I don't know about you, but when I see two people who have loved eachother for the better part of a decade, who intend to get married and spend the rest of their lives together, who met when they were so young...that makes me happy to know that is going on in the world.  And now here he is seeking basic human understanding on the internet -- it is safe to assume that he probably talks more frankly in private groups of like-minded people.

By including us, the k5 community, in his sexuality, he is anchoring his sexuality within a community that can subject him to judgement.  If we alienate him because he has a successful and mutual relationship with a consenting individual then he will go underground and we will have forfeit the opportunity to guide him in the future.  Right now, he has illustrated that he has a clear idea of right and wrong.  He believes that sharing love with a little girl can be positive but waiting at the bus stop with a bag of candy is wrong.  If we alienate him now then the lesson he will take home is "I am wrong," and you ultimately cannot do anything about who you are.  If you become convinced that you are, at your core, an evil being, then the difference between right and wrong loses its relevance.

Oh, and, re: child porn.  It seems to me that the creation of child porn is generally not the "informed consent" sort of process that I'd approve of.  If he pays for child porn, I'd really rather he didn't.  On the other hand, there is a principle of the universe which is as strong as entropy (much stronger than human will/moral judgement): information wants to be free.  It is a confusing issue to say the least.

Wow, it turns out I had a lot to say.  Judgement of others is one of my hot buttons, I guess.



[ Parent ]
The ethics (none / 0) (#621)
by StewedSquirrels on Tue Dec 26, 2006 at 02:09:00 PM EST

The ethics of the topic are discussed extensively in Plato's The Republic and many of his other writings.  Historic accounts come from him, along with any number of primary sources.

Many historians believe it is likely that Plato was a young partner of Socrates.  Plato and Socrates met when Plato was around 10 or 11 years old and were close companions until Socrates' death when Plato was 28.  It is also believed that Aristotle was a young partner of Plato in the same context.

I am not as familiar with the Japanese heritage, but I have seen accounts of the ancient samurai texts where similar relationships are described as 'essential to the training of new samurai'.

Stew

[ Parent ]

Canada (3.00 / 2) (#559)
by nightfire on Wed Dec 20, 2006 at 02:27:10 PM EST

A big topic lately in Canada is regarding the age of consent here.

Though it's not quite as extreme, certainly there are a lot of people here who are uncomfortable with our limit, 14 (excluding authority relationships).

We're a perfectly functioning democracy (or as close as you can get, imho), a successful society, and our crime is relatively low.  We only recently started making war with other nations, and prior to that have not had a national tendency towards violence.

Now sure there's a big difference between 14 and 10, but there's also a big difference between 14 and 18.

I said it in another thread - I think we are all, at least to some degree, victims of those who want to control us (church, government, soccer moms).  The easiest way to control people is to divide them, and the easiest way to do that (within the legal limits of a society) is to take something they all have in common (sex) and polarize it.

Nothing gets people riled like sex.

I don't think it's some national conspiracy to hate gays, "sluts," pedos or whatever.  But I don't think it's without some amount of incitement, because it's a useful way to control people.

[ Parent ]

a more personal question (1.50 / 1) (#604)
by tert on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 02:42:55 PM EST

Someone asked you to provide a statement from your fiance, and then when you provided it, she was accused of writing like a ten year old.  I happen to agree that she writes like a ten year old, but I feel this way about most 19 year olds, and this is in fact a major part of why I no longer date 19 year olds.

But it raises an issue...she knows that you find little girls attractive, and she knows that you specifically found her at age ten attractive.  Do you think that this gives her an incentive to alter her behaviour/mannerisms/appearance to be more child-like?  Do you think this has a good or bad effect on her?  Do you think it might stunt her development?

Please don't take this as an attack, I am just curious.  I have seen many relationships between "consenting adults" in which harmful role-plays were reinforced in this manner (is this one of the hallmarks of co-dependence?).  It just seems like an issue that you would have a unique perspective on.

me again (2.66 / 3) (#607)
by floridasun on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 10:19:40 PM EST

Hi, this is his fiance again. I'll put some actual effort into writing a response this time because i don't want to be judged by that on it's own. English isn't my first language and I was tired and i've been writing exams all week.

I'm sorry to the other lady who i wrote to. I didn't mean to attack you personally, it's just that i feel like for the last 10 years of my life i've had to justify myself over and over again. I know you only want to help, and i guess most people here do. Yes i am young, but here is what i know. When everyone else, even my own mum was telling me what i should feel, james was asking me what I was feeling. When people turned their backs on me, he was there. When we broke up 4 years ago for a year, i dated two other guys. one was 17 and eventually cheated on me. My mum even liked him at first. The other was 18 and his friends told him i was too young. He left me, and it hurt very much. Even during all of this, james was there. He listened to me while i told him my stories, and when i told him i made a mistake breaking up with him, he forgave me. So sorry for being rude before but I was reading what some people were saying about him and it hurts me too because i love him.

He asked me if it was ok if he wrote this for everyone here and I said yes because i saw how much it hurts him to read about other people going to jail for what we did. I thought this might make him feel better, but maybe it wasn't a good idea. I don't want to fight anymore, and neither does he.

b

[ Parent ]

So in other words (2.00 / 2) (#625)
by HollyHopDrive on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 09:16:30 AM EST

you are vulnerable and fragile, and as a child you didn't have a close friend or family member you felt you could talk to. You have been hurt in the past and you are still suffering from it.

Exactly as I suspected.

I disagree with you when you say you don't need to be protected or liberated. I think you need both greatly. I am just sorry that you had experiences at such a young and tender age that taught you sex was the way to them.

I think what James did was irresponsible, perverse and inexcusable. Nevertheless, for your sake I wish you well.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

Wow (2.50 / 1) (#626)
by nightfire on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 06:56:06 PM EST

You're so different than me it's amazing. :)

What a fascinating species we are to enjoy such diversity in thought processes.

[ Parent ]

Well (none / 0) (#628)
by HollyHopDrive on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 04:42:47 AM EST

that's life's rich tapestry for you. God is a craftsman.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

yfi (none / 0) (#629)
by cDiss on Fri Dec 29, 2006 at 01:09:46 PM EST

in the most fundamental way

[ Parent ]
Do I? (none / 0) (#633)
by HollyHopDrive on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 12:53:26 PM EST

Oh well. Shit happens.

I make too much sense to be on the Internet.
[ Parent ]

Sanctimonious twit (1.00 / 1) (#634)
by kbudha on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 05:08:11 PM EST

Pompous, self-righteous.

You probably hurt just as many ppl in your life with your holier than thou bitch attitude.

Oh but that's totally excusable, right?

[ Parent ]

I find her sig (1.00 / 1) (#635)
by nightfire on Wed Jan 03, 2007 at 07:10:48 PM EST

especially amusing: "I make too much sense to be on the internet."

It's amusing because to me she seems to represent the average person.  You can read thousands of trite comments written by the same cast-in-stone moralists pretty much anywhere.

"sense" implies critical thought, and I've so far been unable to detect any of that. :)

Oh to have a point-of-view gun.  I'd give anything to spend a day in the life of a religious zealot.

[ Parent ]

plays to her ego (1.00 / 1) (#636)
by kbudha on Thu Jan 04, 2007 at 12:54:06 PM EST

One of her asshat worshipers typed it so she had to quote it for the world to see.

Another of her braindead crew was arguing with me and sigged her calling me a "shitty troll".

They thought it was so funny that they included it in their circle-jerk sessions.
.

[ Parent ]

Answer (2.50 / 1) (#608)
by floridasun on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 10:32:30 PM EST

Wow, great question.

I don't think I can give you an honest answer, but I'll try.

It's been a loooooong time that I've known her, so it's hard for me to judge.  She'd kick my ass if I called her immature. lol.

She just wrote a response to hollyhopdrive on another thread if you want to read it.  I didn't mention it the first time, but english IS her second (actually technically third) language, and she's not a big computer user so please don't judge her writing style.

Anyway, as I mentioned in my story my attraction to young people isn't exclusive and I like the idea of growing old with someone, so I don't think I've influenced her in this regard.  But hey who knows.  I'm more immature than any of my friends, and they find that amusing.  I laugh at stupid shit and sometimes my naivety gets the best of me.. so that probably rubs off on her.

I will say that I think she's more mature than our mutual best friend, who is also her age.  She'd kick my ass too if she heard that... lol.

We are certainly codependent... but I don't think that's really a bad thing.  I need her, and she needs me.. that's why we're getting married. :)

I would maybe worry about the situation where someone isn't attracted to adults at all (emotionally or sexually) and is dating someone much younger than him/herself.  That could get complicated.  But luckily for us it's not a problem in our relationship.

[ Parent ]

Leaving (1.50 / 2) (#609)
by floridasun on Thu Dec 21, 2006 at 10:49:09 PM EST

My fiance would prefer it if I left this conversation, and she's right..  I think we've shared enough of our private lives. ;)

I want to say in summary thanks to those of you who were at least willing to talk reasonably about all of this.  I think it's positive to have SOME amount of balance to the horrible media reports we hear again and again about sex (and other) crimes.

Yes there are some evil people out there who rape, kill, abuse and manipulate.  I want to see them in jail probably more than you do, especially when they target young people.  I am, after all, attracted to young people.

But these people are the MINORITY.  Please keep in mind that every time you hear about a horrible crime, there are millions of others out there who can act as responsible, loving people.

Bye!

cough up your actual k5 nick (3.00 / 2) (#610)
by cDiss on Fri Dec 22, 2006 at 12:26:48 AM EST



[ Parent ]
so i herd this story's popular [nt] (2.75 / 4) (#611)
by Aurochs on Fri Dec 22, 2006 at 12:28:29 AM EST


--
you're a worthless cocknozzle no matter who or what you post about or pay attention to. shut the fuck up.
--
answers from a pedo (2.25 / 4) (#630)
by realperson on Sat Dec 30, 2006 at 11:46:46 PM EST

yes, that's the shorthand we use (pedo).  this has been a very informative thread.  i have been very impressed that most of the members here have been able to intelligently discuss this topic, without all the hyperbole and vitriol.

allow me to let you peek into my world.  feel free to curse me out if you wish.  i would rather hear your cogent and sincere thoughts on what i have to say.  FIRST, LET ME QUALIFY THIS BY SAYING THAT MY PEDO FANTASIES ARE JUST THAT - FANTASIES.  I HAVE NEVER ACTED OUT THIS FANTASY, AND NEVER WILL!

the link to this thread was posted in a forum that caters to people like me, who trade pics and vids of underage girls.  i actually stopped trading a long time ago, and just occassionaly view such pictures, but i never keep them.  i destroyed everything i had, and dont keep them (pics or vids) anymore, because it's too dangerous.  the cops could bust down my door tomorrow, and wouldnt find anything to charge me with.  i know how to properly wash and bleach my PC, so there is zero trace of any illegal pics.

i now visit the board just to chat, read and post interesting threads, and play on-line games.  and no, the particular board that i visit doesnt contain hard-core cp - no sexually suggestive activity at all.  even a vid of a fully clothed girl was deleted, because she was sucking a cucumber that was dripping with a seamen-like substance - that was just too suggestive.  the board does contain links to pictures (on various safe hosts) of fully nude underage girls, some of them very explicit.

the general age-range preference is between 10-14 - the "budding" years.  yes, there have been many polls at the board, so i know.  that is my age-range preference for that VIRTUAL world as well.  in real life, i dont bother with underage girls, although i certainly do admire them.  i admire their beauty, as i would admire a flower, or a good landscape view.  i.e., i admire them as being beautiful.  i also like their innocence, their wonder, and so on.  i admire this in all children, although, i dont have any sexual attraction to males.

again, it's important to note that this fantasy is in a virtual world.  in real life, i have a girlfriend, and i very much enjoy adult sexual relationships.

another important point already recognized in this thread is that just because a person has a sexual attraction to underage girls, this doesnt mean that they are a molester, or that they would ever act on that attraction.  believe me, i have had many opportunities to act on that, but i never did, because i knew it was wrong.

our society today does not want to recognize that our children are becoming sexualized at younger and younger ages.  someone referred to the southpark slut episode, which dealt with this phenom.  all the opportunities i mentioned earlier were from young girls coming on to me.  yes, some jackass (in the threads below) was in total denial that this happens, but believe me, it does.

just a couple examples:

  1.  i was baby-sitting for 2 young girls (ages around 10yo).  i was 17 at the time (im over 40 now), and hadnt even realized my attraction yet.  i was watching TV, and the girls came out and starting flashing their butts (a "BA").  when i ignored this, they came on even stronger.  finally, 1 of them asked me if i would fuck her.  i didnt really want to have sex with such a young girl, but decided to play along.  long story short, there was no molestation.  but, it eventually get to the point where i could have penetrated her, but i didnt.  i went to the other girl (in another bedroom), and asked her if she wanted to do anything (i had no intention of doing anything, but i did want to find out what the heck was up with her).  i was fascinated that these young girls said they wanted to fuck.  well, the second girl sheepishly said no, and i said okay.  about a year later, i saw the first girl at the complex pool, swaggering down the patio with half her ass hanging out.  the point of this anecdote is that some girls really do want to explore.  imho, they are already sexualized by society and poor parenting, and are just looking for the right guy and the right opportunity to explore that.  an active pedo will seek this type of girl out, and exploit that.  but in reality, who is really exploiting who?  peope dont want to recognize that their sweet innocent little girl has sexual desires, and wants to explore that.  i was easily able to discren that the second girl was not interested in this activity.  SO, EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT!!!

  2.  i cant count the number of times girls came on to me in high school.  one memorable event was when a couple of freshmen offered to give me a BJ, if i would give them a ride home (i didnt take them up on the offer - guess i was weird for not accepting).

  3.  my little buddy from the neighborhood (remember, im not into guys) brought over some of his female friends.  the 11yo was literally all over me.  it was hot, so i had my shirt off.  she was constantly finding excuses to touch me, to make physical contact.  at one point, she found an excuse to bury her face in my chest.

some thoughts on the threads above:

RE THE POWER ISSUE:
i have found that most of the guys on the forum do tend to be control freaks, or above average in the control area.  i am a bit like that too.  i think this does play into the pedo scenario, of sexual control.  for me, the fantasy is that IT IS SO WRONG to be doing that with a young girl.

BEST WAY TO AVOID HAVING YOUR CHILD ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY:
give them lots of love and attention.  dont mistify sex, and dont place a stigma on it.  explain that it is something natural that 2 adults do, preferably, if they are in love.

pay attention to those who pay attention to your kids.  

GENERAL ISSUES:

i found the thread started by SocratesGhost to be the most informed and right on the mark, about the possible damage that can be done when a child is coerced into sexual activity.  she seems very knowlegable.

when determining if "damage" will be done, i think we need to make a distinction between the girls that desire to be sexually active, and the "easy prey" girls that can be coerced into sexual activity.  in my #1 example above, the first girl seemed to be ready and willing and have sex.  the second girl clearly did not want to, but if i was a predator, i think i could have coerced her into it.

i also agree that we DO need to set an arbitrary age limit, even though one size doesnt fit all.  i agree that in western society, we have the luxury of allowing our children much longer childhoods (we marry at a much later age than most of the rest of the world).  having a longer childhood is a good thing.  but, this is in conflict with the natural human desire for sexual intimacy that starts to bud long before children are mature enough to appropriately handle sexual issues.

RE THE WHAT  FLORIDASUN DID:
he reminds me of many of the guys on the board (maybe 1/3).  they never really came to terms with the fact that they like underage girls.  so, they try and romanticize their attraction, saying how much they "love" these girls, not only sexually, but emotionally.  they shudder at the thought of anyone "hurting" these girls (i.e., anyone sticking their dick into these girls).  they have to wrap themselves up in a psuedo boyfriend-girlfriend "relationship" in order to justify being intimate with the girl.  look, i undertand how they feel - i "love" kids too, but i dont stick my dick in them (or do anything else sexual with them).  it's worth noting that NOBODY on my board EVER talks about actually acting out this fantasy.  it is quite taboo to do so.  this is because when you get all of the intellectual arguments and crap, we all know that IT IS WRONG to fuck young girls.

lauree makes a good point that a true pedo, by definition, would never hurt the girls, because he loves them.

i wont even go into girls that have reached puberty, have more womanly features, and are fertile.  like i mentioned, western society has the luxury of extending their children's childhood, and that's a cool thing.  but dont for one minute ever think that biologically, these 13 year old girls arent ready to be with a man, and to bear children.  and dont think for a minute, NOT EVEN A MINUTE, that 99% of all single men, regardless of age, wouldnt wet his pants at the thought of sleeping with a hot, young, celulite free 14yo, before she chopped off her hair, died it blonde or auburn, chunked-up, and got a piss-ass american woman attitude.  what's so fucked up about western society is that they are in denial about human sexuality, all the while, glorifying girls and young women who dress and act like sluts.  yah yah, i know, it's a double-standard, so stfu all you feminists.

BOTTOM LINE:
imho, coercing or leading an underage girl into sexual activity is wrong.  but, we should recognize that plenty of girls are ready to explore that, and agressive in doing so.  while i would NEVER act on that (even with these agressive girls), i wouldnt condemn someone who did.  we dont realy know much about floridasun's girl, so we cannot say.  from her single post, it is incredibly clear that she is supremely immature and SO not ready for an adult relationship, even at her present age of 19.  suffice to say that her marriage to floridasun will last less than 5 years, and end with divorce and child support.  i hope that floridasun thinks fulfilling his fantasy is worth it (i bet it will be for him, but that's for him to decide).

PS - how did i get into this interest, and how did i find this stuff on the internet?  i dont normally watch oprah, but happened to see a catchy promo about how underage girls were being exploited on girl modeling sites.  i watched the episode, and learned the names of these "horrible men" who were exploiting these innocent young girls.  from there, it was easy to find.  i included this little tidbit to show that all this titilating media sensationalism is not helping to solve the problem of child molestation, or even child exploitation.  thanks oprah!
----- Real estate agent from Brooklin.

Wow. You've really justified this in your mind. (2.00 / 2) (#643)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 11:26:56 AM EST

I hope they catch you soon.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

omg u r so provocative!!!! (none / 0) (#657)
by Comrade Wonderful on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 04:30:44 PM EST

u r cool beans cap'n!

[ Parent ]
omg! don't hurt yourself (none / 0) (#669)
by realperson on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 02:12:32 AM EST

when you fall off your high horse!  perhaps you would have been more comfortable in nazi germany, or communist china, where the thought police efficiently control thoughts for a brave new world.

did you grasp that what i described to you is a fantasy, never to be acted out?  did you grasp that i don't do anything illegal, and therefore, will not get "caught" for anything?

if you want to bash me for having sick fantasies, then that would at least show a tiny bit of intelligence.  but to ignorantly advocate me getting "caught" by the thought police truly shows where you stand, mr. big brother.

----- Real estate agent from Brooklin.
[ Parent ]

PS - (none / 0) (#670)
by realperson on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 02:15:23 AM EST

perhaps you have been Freeballin just a bit too much.
----- Real estate agent from Brooklin.
[ Parent ]
I wish some one would write a rape fetish article (none / 0) (#644)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 11:30:56 AM EST

It'd be great to hear the various justifications for perverts that like to think about rape all day long but never act on it. And, then it would be gret to hear from their spouses who they have raped or something.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.

Hey, a moralist! (none / 1) (#645)
by nightfire on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 05:53:35 PM EST

I'm curious; you seem to have a very well defined moral baseline.  What is your position on the following activies:

  • Sex before marriage
  • Homosexuality
  • Sex between a man who is 20 and a woman who is 50
  • Heterosexual sodomy
  • Killing in the name of religion
  • Killing in the name of nationality/statehood
  • Illegal drug use
  • Legal/illegal drug abuse

Perhaps you could write a book on your interpretation of rights and wrongs - those of us who aren't entitled to an opinion on the matter have much to learn from you!

[ Parent ]
Hey, a bigot! (none / 0) (#647)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 09:04:30 PM EST

Here's my stance on really strange sexual activities that are illegal when carried out: they're bad.

Now, talk to us when and if you get to 30 and have a family of some sort. I mean, even if it's you, a goat and two dogs, one of which is the 'Mom'.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

Bigot (none / 0) (#648)
by nightfire on Mon Jan 08, 2007 at 09:47:00 PM EST

Ah the irony of calling me a bigot.

Anyway, so you basically define what you find morally reprehensible by its legal status?

Or just the sexual activities?

[ Parent ]

Hey, you know what? You don't get the moral (none / 0) (#651)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 07:00:48 AM EST

high-ground by justifying pedophilia and rape fantasies, m'kay? This isn't church and you aren't the understanding, all-seeing, elder of the congregation. This isn't school and you aren't the guidance counsellor that will help me find my way.

Relative morality only goes so far, kid. And it doesn't extend to fantasies of hurting others, nor does include the actual act. If you can justify that, you're a sick person AND a moron.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

I did not justify anything (none / 1) (#652)
by nightfire on Wed Jan 10, 2007 at 02:03:17 AM EST

And I'm not seeking moral high ground.

But anyway, wtf do fantasies have to do with morals?  The two seem utterly unrelated.

"Morals" or ethics govern interpersonal relationships.  Or so says this godless heathen. :)

Also, not that I have a real problem with it (I'd give anything to be a kid again, ignorant of the world around us), but calling me a kid is somewhat silly.  I am 28.

[ Parent ]

Well, mentally/emotionally a kid, then. (none / 1) (#653)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Wed Jan 10, 2007 at 12:40:56 PM EST

Either way, what you really think is what governs your morals, not what you are forced to do because of laws.

Otherwise, no one would have a problem with Right-Wingers that want all homosexuals dead, even though they aren't allowed to kill them.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

This is fun (none / 1) (#654)
by nightfire on Wed Jan 10, 2007 at 06:33:02 PM EST

I still think you mean it as an insult.. but whatever.  If you say so, I'm mentally/emotionally a "kid."

Either way, what you really think is what governs your morals, not what you are forced to do because of laws.

What do you mean?  One's morals are determined by mental constructs and personal experiences.

Laws certainly influence peoples' morals because as human beings we tend to cherish the familiar.  When you live in a society that has an established tradition (enforced by law), you tend to adapt socially, and this is often influences your own personal morals.

For example, in societies which promote and cherish violence (wars, violence anti-drug policies, violence towards women, etc), you find a higher than average percentage of people who can easily justify killing others.  A society which has strict anti-smoking laws tends to produce more people, over time, who have moral issues with smoking.

Otherwise, no one would have a problem with Right-Wingers that want all homosexuals dead, even though they aren't allowed to kill them.

I don't think anyone has a problem with right-wingers who want all homosexuals dead.

What a lot of people have a problem with is right-wingers expressing this desire in the hopes of effecting legislation to that end (or more realistically simply as a means of persecuting/prosecuting at will).

If a right-winger does not express their desire to harm/interfere with homos, immigrants, communists, muslims, abortion doctors, etc., then it is impossible to identify them by this characteristic.

[ Parent ]

-1, totally US-centric thinking (none / 0) (#655)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 07:51:12 AM EST

Hey, let's face it, bigot: you hate the idea of having to live in the real world. You just like to spout ideas and dismiss the reality that most people live.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

Je pense que (none / 0) (#658)
by nightfire on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 09:50:34 PM EST

Il y a un difference entre Quebec et les etats unis. :)

I think there's a difference between Quebec and the US (and I am not American), and most certainly I'm not the only one that lives in this reality here.  I think you may be a little too english-centric thinking.

And you keep using that word 'bigot.'  I don't think it means what you think it means.

Ok, I'm done. :)

[ Parent ]

Oh, God Quebecois....... (none / 0) (#659)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Fri Jan 12, 2007 at 09:37:47 AM EST

Certainly the most ignorant people I've ever met. I remember being in Cuba surrounded by bloated Quebecois and they kept trying to tell the Cubans how to pronounce things correctly in French. Of course, they had to do it in the most butchered English you've ever heard.

All I could think was: listen you ignorant cows, you can barely speak English and this guy speaks 4 languages functionally better than you can speak English, so leave him alone.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

Not Quebecois either. (none / 0) (#660)
by nightfire on Fri Jan 12, 2007 at 12:45:48 PM EST

But keep guessing. :)

I'm sorry you had a bad experience with them though.  Most of those I have met have been wonderful people.

Obviously I don't know the specifics of the situation - it sounds like they were doing it out of arrogance - but it is common for foreigners to try to teach their language to others.  That's how we learn! :)

Of course, they had to do it in the most butchered English you've ever heard.

That's not surprising; most of the world doesn't speak English, and in Quebec there are many of us who fall into this category.  The reason many of us don't speak English here is because French is the superior language to have fluency in here.  That is, to know English well is less of an asset than to know French well.  Hence, some of us can bearly speak English.  It isn't due to malice; it's just the case that French is the better language to learn fluently when you live here (..so if you have to choose).

All I could think was: listen you ignorant cows, you can barely speak English

It still really surprises me that you called me a bigot.  You wear your bigotry like a purple heart. :)

Again I must stress - most of your fellow humans alive today do not speak our language.  We are a minority on the planet, so relax and show a little humility. :)

[ Parent ]

Most people don't speak English? Seriously? (none / 0) (#661)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Fri Jan 12, 2007 at 12:48:50 PM EST

How can you say that?

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

Hah. (none / 0) (#662)
by vectro on Fri Jan 12, 2007 at 06:16:50 PM EST

This is fun. You should try harder, though, really. You'll never get a rise at this rate.

BTW, the number of first-language English speakers is around 400 million, and the number of second-language English speakers is not more than a couple billion. Which means most citizens of this here globe don't speak English.

Kinda ironic, since you're the one making accusations of provincialism.

“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]

Shut up (none / 0) (#663)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Fri Jan 12, 2007 at 06:33:49 PM EST

EVERYONE speaks English.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

Better... (none / 0) (#664)
by nightfire on Fri Jan 12, 2007 at 09:07:47 PM EST

But in order to be effective you must be consistent and this statement contradicts your previous statement.

[ Parent ]
O R U TELLING ME HOW TO TROLL? (none / 0) (#665)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Sun Jan 14, 2007 at 09:40:52 PM EST

Thanks, guru!!! You are rilly helpful.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

A rapist will always (none / 1) (#656)
by Comrade Wonderful on Thu Jan 11, 2007 at 04:28:53 PM EST

get more action than you will.

[ Parent ]
SRSLY. (none / 0) (#666)
by Egil Skallagrimson on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 07:46:11 AM EST

My wife NEVER has secks with me. Never. Those kids came from a box of Wheaties and a funny movie.

----------------

Enterobacteria phage T2 is a virulent bacteriophage of the T4-like viruses genus, in the family Myoviridae. It infects E. coli and is the best known of the T-even phages. Its virion contains linear double-stranded DNA, terminally redundant and circularly permuted.
[ Parent ]

gee whiz, what a surprise! (none / 0) (#672)
by realperson on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 02:25:01 AM EST

maybe because you are an idiot.  hmm, maybe she doesnt want to have stupid kids.
----- Real estate agent from Brooklin.
[ Parent ]
yes, i imagine you would enjoy that (none / 0) (#671)
by realperson on Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 02:20:51 AM EST

being the idiot that you are, i suppose that you would prefer that the author of the rape fantasy to then go and act out their fantasy.  

do you realize how stupid you sound?  do you realize that you are bashing people for "bad" fantasies?  and then you go on to make the illogical and idiotic jump that the spouses of the rape fantasy author are raped by them?

how old are you anyway?  you display the logic of a 12yo.  next, you will be calling me a fag.
----- Real estate agent from Brooklin.
[ Parent ]

Ask a Paedophile | 668 comments (628 topical, 40 editorial, 24 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!