|
On November 11 2010 16:50 Hanners wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 16:33 tbrown47 wrote:On November 11 2010 16:30 tomatriedes wrote:
When I was only about six I had an older female neighbor (about 11 I think) who wanted to experiment. It went from kissing to genital touching to getting completely naked and lying on top of each other. Now, I might not have had the lust of an adult but I definitely remember finding the experience pleasurable.
That is the problem that I(and presumably most people against it) have with it, though. : / Then you should try getting over it? *I* don't even have the lust of "an adult" in my sexual interactions.
With that kind of screen name, I don't think you would have. Just imagine how filthy human sweat is... and you know, how much more would other human secretions be?
+ Show Spoiler +That was a webcomics joke if you don't get it
I'd have to say that I do deplore Amazon taking down the book from availability, but if say, you've read it and you've found out because of tell-tale signs that the book educated you about, that certain persons you know are engaged in child molestation, that it was a good thing to have known? Even the seemingly most depraved pieces of literature in the RIGHT hands can be an excellent means to get rid of unacceptable behavior.
|
Also, if there's grass on the pitch, let's play. If there's fluff on the muff then she is old enough. etc. lol 
|
I just hope my earnest desire to violently castrate pedophiles and rapists is protected by the same freedoms given to these people on the basis of moral relativism.
|
On November 11 2010 12:17 FrostedMiniWeet wrote:
I'm all for free speech for every other filthy or sleazy act mankind can conceive, but pedophilia is where I, and many people draw the line. Children are the only pure things in this filthy world, and it is our obligation to protect them in any way we can, as they are also the most defenseless. If I have to choose between free speech or protecting children from sexual abuse, then that is an easy choice for me, as I have two children of my own. Ideals need to be reconsidered at some point, as too much of anything can be bad, even freedom, as freedom for one person can result in the sexual slavery of another.
In Germany, Mrs. von der Leyen (then federal minister of family affairs) proposed a system to fight child pornography on the internet. She was crying "OMG OMG THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN! THEY NEED TO BE PROTECTED!" all the time (she didn't actually cry, I think she's quite incapable of that) while promoting her (think tank's) genius idea. And what was that idea? To filter websites that were on a certain blacklist. Internet censorship. The sites would still be there, but people (who don't know how to change their DNS server) would be prevented from viewing them. The law required to put such a system into place would do much more damage than good (in fact... it's quite unlikely to have any positive effects). Yes, children need to be protected, but that does not mean that you need to mindlessly assume anything that had "child protection" on its banner was actually serving that purpose - or was beneficial at all. Allowing censorship to happen is much, much worse than allowing a crappy book to be sold, as it paves the way to shut up more than one author.
Benjamin Franklin wrote:
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
|
On November 11 2010 18:52 Ciryandor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 16:50 Hanners wrote:On November 11 2010 16:33 tbrown47 wrote:On November 11 2010 16:30 tomatriedes wrote:
When I was only about six I had an older female neighbor (about 11 I think) who wanted to experiment. It went from kissing to genital touching to getting completely naked and lying on top of each other. Now, I might not have had the lust of an adult but I definitely remember finding the experience pleasurable.
That is the problem that I(and presumably most people against it) have with it, though. : / Then you should try getting over it? *I* don't even have the lust of "an adult" in my sexual interactions. With that kind of screen name, I don't think you would have. Just imagine how filthy human sweat is... and you know, how much more would other human secretions be? + Show Spoiler +That was a webcomics joke if you don't get it I'd have to say that I do deplore Amazon taking down the book from availability, but if say, you've read it and you've found out because of tell-tale signs that the book educated you about, that certain persons you know are engaged in child molestation, that it was a good thing to have known? Even the seemingly most depraved pieces of literature in the RIGHT hands can be an excellent means to get rid of unacceptable behavior.
I get it. And funnily enough, I have *tons* of physical and sexual hangups.
I personally just don't believe that the repression of ideas or knowledge is ever a good thing.
|
On November 11 2010 18:33 Hanners wrote:The same could be said of a 40 year old virgin. Sexual competency is not restricted (or magically attained) by age.
Um, talking about mental competency for decision-making here, not sexual prowess.
|
On November 11 2010 18:33 Hanners wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 18:20 Psiven wrote:On November 11 2010 17:49 Carefoot wrote:On November 11 2010 17:45 Hanners wrote:
I'm going to turn this into a real hornet's nest by positing a suggestion:
If we weren't told that sexual interaction between adults and children was wrong, would this be an issue?
Like, say a child did experience semi-regular sexual interactions with an adult(s).
Is an adult who engages in sexual activity with a child necessarily using them for sex? How do we know that they're aren't doing it solely for the benefit and pleasure of the child? No they are engaging in a human relationship. We don't know because whenever we try to do anything of the sort we cut to the parents crying on CNN then we read what the viewers have to say. The whole state of humanity is a fucking disaster. Individuals who lack the maturity or basic competency to make decisions about their sexuality are fundamentally incapable of consenting to and thus forming a mutual sexual relationship. You don't need to be told this to understand it, because it follows logically (from what we know about mental capacity, sexual maturity, and consent) that the only relationship between a pedophile and the child they're having sex with is that of predator and prey. The same complete lack of consent applies for a mentally retarded person or an unconscious girl at a party. The same could be said of a 40 year old virgin. Sexual competency is not restricted (or magically attained) by age. Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 18:20 Clues wrote:I would think that people could remember what they were like as children, themselves? You're trying to argue that People, with our very frail and suggestible memory, can properly identify what a child thinks and acts like, Better than the people who spend their day caring after children? Really? You understand that even our memories are mental recreations based upon random projections of the events themselves, easily modifiable by our own biases and ideas right? You understand that trying to relive a stream of consciousness that is 10-30 years in the past is basically impossible right? I'm sorry that you can't remember what it's like to be a child. It's incredibly easy for me. /shrug
This isn' about sexual competency, it's about cognitive abilities and decision making. As stated several times from multiple people children do no possible the same cognitive and reasoning abilities as adults. Its why they're Children! As an adult you have a lot of power over a child through suggestion. In this way it is very difficult to discern what is truly consensual for a child and what is agreed upon because they place their faith in an adult. Its the same reason children can't sign contracts, they don't have the mental facilites yet to make these decisions.
Concerning your point about two children experimenting sexually, yes its a bit weird but we can see that there is no adult suggestion coming in. The ideas and motives behind such an act remain firmly grounded in children, who more or less view themselves as equals. So yea, that sort of interaction is much more agreeable than and Adult and a child.
Children are biologically wired to learn, and learn they do. From teachers, people who show them how to do things, how to better understand the world. The concern with pedophilies is they take up that role of teacher in an area where they are trying to extract personal pleasure. That in of itself should be wrong.
|
I think Amazon removing the book is good. It removes the legitimacy that book would find when being carried by a major retailer like Amazon.
I think as fairly internet savvy people we can all agree that an ebook is easy to share. And the sharing of this book probably started before this huge media shitstorm and would have continued even without it. I would go so far as to say that pedophiles probably don't like amazon knowing their purchasing habits when it comes to things like this and would prefer pirating the book over having their purchase logged.
But again, the legitimacy of a book being carried by Amazon is what was important to remove when they did take the book down.
|
On November 11 2010 19:09 Clues wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 18:33 Hanners wrote:On November 11 2010 18:20 Psiven wrote:On November 11 2010 17:49 Carefoot wrote:On November 11 2010 17:45 Hanners wrote:
I'm going to turn this into a real hornet's nest by positing a suggestion:
If we weren't told that sexual interaction between adults and children was wrong, would this be an issue?
Like, say a child did experience semi-regular sexual interactions with an adult(s).
Is an adult who engages in sexual activity with a child necessarily using them for sex? How do we know that they're aren't doing it solely for the benefit and pleasure of the child? No they are engaging in a human relationship. We don't know because whenever we try to do anything of the sort we cut to the parents crying on CNN then we read what the viewers have to say. The whole state of humanity is a fucking disaster. Individuals who lack the maturity or basic competency to make decisions about their sexuality are fundamentally incapable of consenting to and thus forming a mutual sexual relationship. You don't need to be told this to understand it, because it follows logically (from what we know about mental capacity, sexual maturity, and consent) that the only relationship between a pedophile and the child they're having sex with is that of predator and prey. The same complete lack of consent applies for a mentally retarded person or an unconscious girl at a party. The same could be said of a 40 year old virgin. Sexual competency is not restricted (or magically attained) by age. On November 11 2010 18:20 Clues wrote:I would think that people could remember what they were like as children, themselves? You're trying to argue that People, with our very frail and suggestible memory, can properly identify what a child thinks and acts like, Better than the people who spend their day caring after children? Really? You understand that even our memories are mental recreations based upon random projections of the events themselves, easily modifiable by our own biases and ideas right? You understand that trying to relive a stream of consciousness that is 10-30 years in the past is basically impossible right? I'm sorry that you can't remember what it's like to be a child. It's incredibly easy for me. /shrug This isn' about sexual competency, it's about cognitive abilities and decision making. As stated several times from multiple people children do no possible the same cognitive and reasoning abilities as adults. Its why they're Children! As an adult you have a lot of power over a child through suggestion. In this way it is very difficult to discern what is truly consensual for a child and what is agreed upon because they place their faith in an adult. Its the same reason children can't sign contracts, they don't have the mental facilites yet to make these decisions. Concerning your point about two children experimenting sexually, yes its a bit weird but we can see that there is no adult suggestion coming in. The ideas and motives behind such an act remain firmly grounded in children, who more or less view themselves as equals. So yea, that sort of interaction is much more agreeable than and Adult and a child. Children are biologically wired to learn, and learn they do. From teachers, people who show them how to do things, how to better understand the world. The concern with pedophilies is they take up that role of teacher in an area where they are trying to extract personal pleasure. That in of itself should be wrong.
So we should determine who gets to have sex with who based on scholastic aptitude? IQ levels? Age is such an arbitrary method of measurement in comparison.
Also, we're now condemning people on suspicion of wrong-doing? Thank god we live in a world that suspicion alone does not constitute a crime.
|
|
|
So we should determine who gets to have sex with who based on scholastic aptitude? IQ levels? Age is such an arbitrary method of measurement in comparison.
Also, we're now condemning people on suspicion of wrong-doing? Thank god we live in a world that suspicion alone does not constitute a crime.
Did you read what I wrote? This doesn't have to do with scholastic aptitude or IQ, it has to do with brain chemistry and the act of PHYSICALLY GROWING UP. Your brain changes dramatically over childhood and into puberty; it is after those changes have taken place do we then expect people to be able to think critically and objectivly -enter into contracts, etc. If they are of age and cannot do these things they are almost always considered mentally handicapped, and there are plenty of legal provisions to protect people like that from predators.
I'm not sure where I condemned people on suspicion. I'm guessing its in my last paragraph. Are you saying that its ok to deceive people? To lie and cheat to get your way? I wouldn't say that sort of stuff is illegal but its certainly not what functioning societies are made of.
Again, my largest issue with people saying that Adult-Child sexual relations can be mutual and consensual is that children are not adults, and they are highly susceptible to the suggestions and arguments of adults, without fully understanding the situation they put themselves in.
|
On November 11 2010 19:16 Hanners wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 19:09 Clues wrote:On November 11 2010 18:33 Hanners wrote:On November 11 2010 18:20 Psiven wrote:On November 11 2010 17:49 Carefoot wrote:On November 11 2010 17:45 Hanners wrote:
I'm going to turn this into a real hornet's nest by positing a suggestion:
If we weren't told that sexual interaction between adults and children was wrong, would this be an issue?
Like, say a child did experience semi-regular sexual interactions with an adult(s).
Is an adult who engages in sexual activity with a child necessarily using them for sex? How do we know that they're aren't doing it solely for the benefit and pleasure of the child? No they are engaging in a human relationship. We don't know because whenever we try to do anything of the sort we cut to the parents crying on CNN then we read what the viewers have to say. The whole state of humanity is a fucking disaster. Individuals who lack the maturity or basic competency to make decisions about their sexuality are fundamentally incapable of consenting to and thus forming a mutual sexual relationship. You don't need to be told this to understand it, because it follows logically (from what we know about mental capacity, sexual maturity, and consent) that the only relationship between a pedophile and the child they're having sex with is that of predator and prey. The same complete lack of consent applies for a mentally retarded person or an unconscious girl at a party. The same could be said of a 40 year old virgin. Sexual competency is not restricted (or magically attained) by age. On November 11 2010 18:20 Clues wrote:I would think that people could remember what they were like as children, themselves? You're trying to argue that People, with our very frail and suggestible memory, can properly identify what a child thinks and acts like, Better than the people who spend their day caring after children? Really? You understand that even our memories are mental recreations based upon random projections of the events themselves, easily modifiable by our own biases and ideas right? You understand that trying to relive a stream of consciousness that is 10-30 years in the past is basically impossible right? I'm sorry that you can't remember what it's like to be a child. It's incredibly easy for me. /shrug This isn' about sexual competency, it's about cognitive abilities and decision making. As stated several times from multiple people children do no possible the same cognitive and reasoning abilities as adults. Its why they're Children! As an adult you have a lot of power over a child through suggestion. In this way it is very difficult to discern what is truly consensual for a child and what is agreed upon because they place their faith in an adult. Its the same reason children can't sign contracts, they don't have the mental facilites yet to make these decisions. Concerning your point about two children experimenting sexually, yes its a bit weird but we can see that there is no adult suggestion coming in. The ideas and motives behind such an act remain firmly grounded in children, who more or less view themselves as equals. So yea, that sort of interaction is much more agreeable than and Adult and a child. Children are biologically wired to learn, and learn they do. From teachers, people who show them how to do things, how to better understand the world. The concern with pedophilies is they take up that role of teacher in an area where they are trying to extract personal pleasure. That in of itself should be wrong. Age is such an arbitrary method of measurement in comparison.
Yes, age is arbitrary within the slight biological differences in people. For that reason it is set on the higher bound of reasonable out of caution.
No, that doesn't mean it should be eliminated. It is the best that can easily be done.
Children should not be allowed to sign contracts. End of story.
|
On November 11 2010 19:22 Clues wrote:Show nested quote +So we should determine who gets to have sex with who based on scholastic aptitude? IQ levels? Age is such an arbitrary method of measurement in comparison.
Also, we're now condemning people on suspicion of wrong-doing? Thank god we live in a world that suspicion alone does not constitute a crime. Did you read that? This doesn't have to do with scholastic aptitude or IQ, it has to do with brain chemistry and the act of PHYSICALLY GROWING UP. Your brain changes dramatically over childhood and into puberty; is after those changes have taken place do we then expect people to be able to think critically and objectivly -enter into contracts, etc. If they are of age and cannot do these things they are almost always considered mentally handicapped, and there are plenty of legal provisions to protect people like that from predators. I'm not sure where I condemned people on suspicion. I'm guessing its in my last paragraph. Are you saying that its ok to deceive people? To lie and cheat to get your way? I wouldn't say that sort of stuff is illegal but its certainly not what functioning societies are made of. Again, my largest issue with people saying that Adult-Child sexual relations can be mutual and consensual is that children are not adults, and they are highly susceptible to the suggestions and arguments of adults, without fully understanding the situation they put themselves in.
your position still presupposes that sex is a big deal though. that a child being tricked or coerced or manipulated into a state of mind where they desire sex (this is different from tricked into sex) is the end of the world. that sex is like a contract. that you need to be protected from sex. that sex is above and beyond any other physical contact.
i understand that you believe this and that is fine. can you understand it is possible to believe otherwise without being "sick"?
|
There's a lot of closet pedos betraying themselves in this thread 
Age ain't arbitrary. You physically undergo changes that contribute to the maturing of the body and mind. It's called puberty. It doesn't complete until you're a legal adult. Which has to do with your age.
|
United States43949 Posts
On November 11 2010 14:01 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 14:00 MiniRoman wrote:On November 11 2010 13:36 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On November 11 2010 13:25 MiniRoman wrote:On November 11 2010 13:16 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On November 11 2010 13:10 MiniRoman wrote:
And that offers any sort of redemption in what way? The book offers guidance on how to avoid being caught while carrying on sexual interactions with children. You seriously gonna get into potential justifications for why the sexual assault occurs?
If you want to feel powerful over a child, offer them an icecream and hold it above your head. Wow you're so powerful. feel better? No? Might as well rape them, then I'll feel in control!
Clearly rape isn't sexual. I'm not talking about the book. I'm just saying it's ignorant to assume all pedophiles are child molesters who want to hurt children. When did I condone raping children? Well you chose to ignore the reality of whats being discussed to argue about words. Any sort of sexual release from viewing children is just wrong. If a pedophile gets off to anything child-pornographic related then it reinforces a system in which I'm sure somewhere a kid was hurt for that end. Is that really something acceptable? Goes against my human nature. I'll accept ignorance and hold a prejudice against pedophiles, doesn't bother me so much. Thanks for making that distinction between child molester and pedophile though, what a big deal it was. Sorry, it's annoying when people try to brand the innocent as rapists. It's doubly annoying when people accept willful ignorance to hate something they don't understand. Don't imply for a second you know how all pedophiles think or act. You sound like an annoying pedophile to me. I don't consider any sexual act relating to children "innocent". They may not be rapists but that's not an act if innocence. edit: so let me ask you, don't find anything sinister about the desires of pedophiles? Not every pedophile is the same. I consider the desire and intent to molest a pre-pubescent child sinister and wrong. I do not consider it wrong to merely be attracted to children. Thoughts and feelings don't harm children. Child molesters do. Thoughts don't necessitate action. Go ahead and write me off as an annoying pedophile but at least understand something before you decide to hate it.
I entirely agree with this post. You cannot criminalise a sexual preference any more than you can criminalise a political opinion or a favourite colour, it is simply a thought. I very much doubt pedophiles wake up one morning and decide regular sex is boring so they're gonna be attracted to children instead. If a friend told me they were attracted to children I'd be like "wow, that sucks" but I wouldn't stop being friends with them because they've not done anything wrong. If they subsequently became a child molestor then of course I'd disown them and hope they went to jail but if a normal heterosexual friend raped an adult then I'd disown them too. Thoughts are not and should not be illegal. I think the massive social stigma and shit like jailing people for looking at underage hentai (if there can be such a thing) is part of the problem. If a pedophile can find a way to vent sexual frustrations without hurting any child then that is something we need more of, not less.
As a hypothetical, if a friend confessed to you he had an occasional rape fantasy would you think any less of him? He's never raped anyone or done anything to make you think he would and he's a morally decent person who you've known for ages. Would you still let your girlfriend hang out with him?
Now they confess pedophilia, same friend who you've still known forever and still know he'd never hurt a child. Would you let him babysit your kids?
If you said yes to the first and no to the second please justify the response.
|
On November 11 2010 19:22 Clues wrote:Show nested quote +So we should determine who gets to have sex with who based on scholastic aptitude? IQ levels? Age is such an arbitrary method of measurement in comparison.
Also, we're now condemning people on suspicion of wrong-doing? Thank god we live in a world that suspicion alone does not constitute a crime. Did you read that? This doesn't have to do with scholastic aptitude or IQ, it has to do with brain chemistry and the act of PHYSICALLY GROWING UP. Your brain changes dramatically over childhood and into puberty; is after those changes have taken place do we then expect people to be able to think critically and objectivly -enter into contracts, etc. If they are of age and cannot do these things they are almost always considered mentally handicapped, and there are plenty of legal provisions to protect people like that from predators. I'm not sure where I condemned people on suspicion. I'm guessing its in my last paragraph. Are you saying that its ok to deceive people? To lie and cheat to get your way? I wouldn't say that sort of stuff is illegal but its certainly not what functioning societies are made of. Again, my largest issue with people saying that Adult-Child sexual relations can be mutual and consensual is that children are not adults, and they are highly susceptible to the suggestions and arguments of adults, without fully understanding the situation they put themselves in.
I don't really know what to say other than we don't share the same narrative.
You seem to have this idea that there's a steadfast, always true formula for the development of a person. Sadly, you're mistaken. People go through puberty at different ages and some people don't go through puberty at all.
Entering into contracts (especially legal ones) is a horrible example because people get roped and tricked into ones that are not good for them every day no matter what their age is.
|
On November 11 2010 19:33 LunarC wrote:There's a lot of closet pedos betraying themselves in this thread Age ain't arbitrary. You physically undergo changes that contribute to the maturing of the body and mind. It's called puberty. It doesn't complete until you're a legal adult. Which has to do with your age.
puberty is not nearly complete when you reach the age of consent.
i support gay marriage; i'm not gay.
i support the emancipation proclamation; i'm not black.
i don't even support sex with children, but simply believe it isn't inherently evil outside the context of our society; i'm clearly a pedophile?
|
There's a bit of naivety in this thread about "Free Speech." Free speech has always had limitations, there are a million cliche'd examples like "yelling fire in a crowded building," and so on. Books that give you intricate details on how to commit extremely serious felonies specifically targeted at assuredly innocent victims isn't a gray area for free speech. It is a manual for crime. You can not write a book about ways to kill the president of the united states or so forth because that's a high felony that endangers someone.
This is all aside from the moral reprehensibility. A book that consecrates hurting children is not okay. It shouldn't be censored, so much as it is paraphernalia in the conspiracy of crime at its outset. It should be illegal to make, and I'm quite sure any judge would rule that it is if this were taken to court. In that sense, illegal to make should also be illegal to distribute.
There were some posts about the thinking of sexual activity with children not being inherently bad unless acted upon, but that's not really the point. You obviously can't punish someone for merely thinking someone, but this book is specifically a guide on how to execute the act. It's not within any realm merely a heinous thought that will not be acted out upon -- it is a damned manual for acting it out.
|
On November 11 2010 19:33 Lachrymose wrote:
your position still presupposes that sex is a big deal though. that a child being tricked or coerced or manipulated into a state of mind where they desire sex (this is different from tricked into sex) is the end of the world. that sex is like a contract. that you need to be protected from sex. that sex is above and beyond any other physical contact.
i understand that you believe this and that is fine. can you understand it is possible to believe otherwise without being "sick"?
No it doesn't. What I'm saying is that how can you be sure that is what the child wants? So you are ok with tricking and/or coercing a child into something?
How is that right?
When an adult interferes with a child for personal gain there is a problem. I dont' care what they're trying to get out of it.
I will say that I think sex has more of an effect than you, but I cannot believe its ok to take advantage of the mental state we know as childhood.
|
On November 11 2010 19:33 Lachrymose wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 19:22 Clues wrote:So we should determine who gets to have sex with who based on scholastic aptitude? IQ levels? Age is such an arbitrary method of measurement in comparison.
Also, we're now condemning people on suspicion of wrong-doing? Thank god we live in a world that suspicion alone does not constitute a crime. Did you read that? This doesn't have to do with scholastic aptitude or IQ, it has to do with brain chemistry and the act of PHYSICALLY GROWING UP. Your brain changes dramatically over childhood and into puberty; is after those changes have taken place do we then expect people to be able to think critically and objectivly -enter into contracts, etc. If they are of age and cannot do these things they are almost always considered mentally handicapped, and there are plenty of legal provisions to protect people like that from predators. I'm not sure where I condemned people on suspicion. I'm guessing its in my last paragraph. Are you saying that its ok to deceive people? To lie and cheat to get your way? I wouldn't say that sort of stuff is illegal but its certainly not what functioning societies are made of. Again, my largest issue with people saying that Adult-Child sexual relations can be mutual and consensual is that children are not adults, and they are highly susceptible to the suggestions and arguments of adults, without fully understanding the situation they put themselves in. your position still presupposes that sex is a big deal though. that a child being tricked or coerced or manipulated into a state of mind where they desire sex (this is different from tricked into sex) is the end of the world. that sex is like a contract. that you need to be protected from sex. that sex is above and beyond any other physical contact. i understand that you believe this and that is fine. can you understand it is possible to believe otherwise without being "sick"?
Really? Even gotten pregnant or an STD from someone preying on you for a high five? Jesus kid you could at least try.
I welcome the day that one of you boneheads manages to legalize underage contracts. I've always wanted an army of little kids legally bound to work for me for 10 cents an hour. Hell yeah. I'll just tell them signing the line is what grownups do.
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
