8th grade Girls Attack/Strip 11-Year-Old Boy - Page 28

On June 06 2011 07:44 Asjo wrote:


People don't cite sources to make judgement calls in everyday situations. I already mentioned where I'm getting this from; intuition. Regardless of what any scientific explanation will say, we understand our sorroudings from how we interpret our experiences. As such, this understanding motivates a large majority of any actions we will make.

It sounds like you have a different interpretations of the events and possible consequences of what occurred. Just like me, you will have a bias that we cause you to interpret it one way or another. As it happens, people will commonly interpret the situation the way I do (the girls being more likely to be traumatized) and as a result will act from these assumptions (whether this manifests in the legal system, parents' reactions or the school's response). Just like the example I made about terrorists, where they are assumed to be more dangerous and are therefore treated differently in a specific situation. The main point is that this action is not motivated for a bias towards favouring girls, but simply an interpretation of events. I'm sure there will be other sitiuations where people react more harshly because it was a girl who did it rather than a boy - all depends on the context.

On June 06 2011 07:49 Nanoko wrote:

First of all let's say he did enjoy it..why was he screaming and bawling his eyes out?,if I am correct in believing that being publicly humiliated to some people is enjoyable...they wouldn't be screaming or protesting against it would they? Call me crazy, but when people do stuff that they enjoy (Even S&M activities) they don't react in the same way that kid did...do they? NO! Good, now we're learning! Also the whole "Close physical contact with girls" thing, at the onset of puberty (can start in either sex between ages of 10-13, potentially earlier, potentially later). You begin to develop an interest in girls...that is not to say you want to see them NAKED OR that you want THEM TO SEE YOU NAKED, you merely begin to get interested at them. You're not by any means "Desperate" to get into contact with girls, in my experience most guys are scared to hell to even TALK to a girl at around that age BECAUSE of their new found interest in them.

It's not like puberty hits and boys are just like "Wow...I never thought about this before but...girls..are awesome, I wanna hang out with them...and ...i get this weird feeling whenever I'm near them..i wonder if they touch me?....". I really am astonished at how you, and people like you can think this way..it's Mind boggling, absolutely Mind Boggling. as for it not being child porn, Clearly you do not know what child porn is, they do not have to be sexually explicit and child nudity IS considered Child Porn. Maybe at ages 1-4 i can see it not being child porn, cause it's just a baby...but even then there are some Sick Fucks out there. I'm honestly hoping you're just trolling, because this is a pretty fucked up way to look at this....saying that kid, who was clearly NOT enjoying being publicly humiliated and assaulted, could've liked it is just...Wow

On June 06 2011 07:44 Asjo wrote:


People don't need to cite sources to make judgement calls in everyday situations. I already mentioned where I'm getting this from; intuition. Regardless of what any scientific research will say, we understand our sorroudings from how we interpret our experiences. As such, this understanding motivates a large majority of any actions we will make.

It sounds like you have a different interpretation of the events and possible consequences of what occurred. Just like me, you will have a bias that we cause you to interpret it one way or another. As it happens, people will commonly interpret the situation the way I do (the girls being more likely to be traumatized) and as a result will act from these assumptions (whether this manifests in the legal system, parents' reactions or the school's response). Just like the example I made about terrorists, where they are assumed to be more dangerous and are therefore treated differently in a specific situation. The main point is that this action is not motivated for a bias towards favouring girls, but simply an interpretation of events. I'm sure there will be other sitiuations where people react more harshly because it was a girl who did it rather than a boy - all depends on the context.

You will only call it "assault" if you make it a legal matter. As such, it is a couple of kids toppling over another kid and holding him down.

As to timidness and openness existing on both sides - of course, I cannot disagree with such statement. However, it is more likely that this event would discourage a girl due to the dynamics of the current gender roles. Guys will typically run head-on into a wall (metaphorically speaking) again and again without being discourage, as they will focus on different aspects of the situation. A girl might be more likely to consider the prospects of making friends with the opposite gender, while guys will accept more superficial relations in the name of exploration. Such an event can be part of an "exploration" whereas it will likely serve to convince you that making friendships will be hard (even if this is just a generalized assumption).

On June 06 2011 07:56 gold_ wrote:

Your thinking is the type of thinking that needs to change if equality is to prevail. Young boys are just as emotional as young girls, unfortunately young boys are taught to not show there feelings. If your in high school as a young boy, and you start crying like a "pussy" you will be picked on as being a "pussy" right? A young girl crying is normally seen as OK, right? Everyone treated the same please! We are all humans, don't forget that. Male or female we all have emotions, if you think otherwise you need to go see a doctor. When this boy gets ridiculed for this and becomes a drug addict and / or kills himself, then what? He was a pussy right? Should have beaten those 3 girls up, right?

On June 05 2011 14:48 jaybee wrote:
Dang I wish that happened to me rofl. No, but seriously, it's kinda pathetic to be bullied by girls LOL. The weak always get bulled; its Nature's way. Still, bullied by girls hahahaha!! just man the boy up for a lil while and he will be fine.

On June 06 2011 08:04 Asjo wrote:


I would say you have a very narrow-minded interpreation of what I am saying. My point is completely valid; he could definitely have enjoyed it. I'm using my own experience and knowledge to make that call. I haven't watched the video with sound (sitting on an old computer with no sound right now), so I don't know whather than would change my perception. However, I do know that even if he got enjoyment from it, he would certainly react vividly and show his dismay. This, as such, is what would serve to encourage to girls and also keep up appearances. He doesn't want it to be known that he enjoys it.

I never said that child porn had to be sexually explicit. I'm saying it involved the exploitation of children. This is not exploitation of the boy for the sake of child pornography (at least not that we know of ). He just happens to be naked, the context not at all related. Now, if you're a family father who takes pictures of your daughter while she is naked and bathing there is nothing wrong with that, even if you have her pose. There is nothing wrong with putting these pictures in your family album and showing said album to visitors. However, if you circulate all the nude pictures among other adult males the circumstances do start to point towards to use of these pictures as child pornography.

You must be conscious about the heavy stigma that had developed around child pornograpy due to media coverage of incidents. This has gotten to the point where some fathers are afraid to touch their own daughters. It is important to insist that the fear of child explotation does invade and dictate other areas of life, where children can be naked in completely normal circumstances, where they are not being exploited.

On June 06 2011 08:00 Redox wrote:
Lol I cant believe that people are discussing every stupid thing someone does somewhere.

According to the standards nowadays a lot of the shit we did as kids would be news now and would be posted and discussed on the internet, just ridiculous.

Seriously, can anyone exlain what is somehow that interesting about this?

On June 06 2011 08:12 Nanoko wrote:


I Really don't understand how people can be so stupid, using ridiculously sexist/biased arguments over a pretty serious matter. The kid liked it? if it were three guys they'd probably be trying to rape her? since it's girls the kid should "count himself lucky"? This is Insanity...INSANITY, Abuse is abuse, if you're a girl or a guy you're going to suffer the SAME trauma from this event. It Does Not Make A Difference What Gender You Are No one, And I Mean No One is going to be PERFECTLY fine, AT THIS AGE, Being STRIPPED NAKED FOR EVERYONE TO SEE AT ALL. "However, it is more likely that this event would discourage a girl due to the dynamics of the current gender roles" Literally my brain is being liquidized and vomited out of my mouth as i read this, and re-read it. Are you basing your gender roles of the 1950s? Boys Like Blue and Trucks and Girls Like Pink and dolls? please, catch up with the rest of society, or at least the non-sexist portion of it, Girls Are JUST AS LIKELY in today's "Gender Roles" To rape a guy, Girls are JUST AS LIKELY to commit assault or other things that is associated with "Male gender roles".....i am literally so, just so..i can't even think straight..you sir or ma'am, have literally caused me physical and mental stress from your ignorant, sexist, pre-2000's era way of thinking..i may have to go cry into a bucket and i better stop doing "Manly things" while i'm at it, it's not in my "Gender role"

On June 06 2011 08:13 Mordiford wrote:


We're getting to an inarguable divide at this point, so I'll kill this conversation.

Alright, your experiences may suggest whatever in regards to the situations being different in gender role reversal.

I think this is a huge double standard that you're perpetuating and it's rather idiotic to me. I don't see how you can say this boy is more likely to enjoy this situation than a girl is, particularly at that age. I think you're incredibly out of touch, so that's that... Don't want to take this further because it'll just be repetitive.

On June 06 2011 08:20 Asjo wrote:


You're basing your call on what you think would be the desired reaction on the interpretation that boys and girls would be completely identitical in this situation. Others will interpret this situation differently and therefore react differently. You make it out to be about double standards or morality, whereas it's simply a judgement call. Statistics will disagree that girls are just as likely to rape a guy.

Of course I will make generalized statements since I simply base this upon my own observation, statements and experiences. It's not a topic I have studied in-depth or have taken any time to write about at lenght. It's simply me using me intuition and common sense based on how I understand the world around me. That does not in itself make me sexist or stupid. If I actually knew the individuals and judge to judge the situation more specifically, I would have to consider it differently, however since I don't, I'm simply considering the general idea of the situation and what rationale could likely be extracted.

On June 06 2011 08:04 Asjo wrote:


I would say you have a very narrow-minded interpreation of what I am saying. My point is completely valid; he could definitely have enjoyed it. I'm using my own experience and knowledge to make that call. I haven't watched the video with sound (sitting on an old computer with no sound right now), so I don't know whather than would change my perception. However, I do know that even if he got enjoyment from it, he would certainly react vividly and show his dismay. This, as such, is what would serve to encourage to girls and also keep up appearances. He doesn't want it to be known that he enjoys it.

I never said that child porn had to be sexually explicit. I'm saying it involved the exploitation of children. This is not exploitation of the boy for the sake of child pornography (at least not that we know of ). He just happens to be naked, the context not at all related. Now, if you're a family father who takes pictures of your daughter while she is naked and bathing there is nothing wrong with that, even if you have her pose. There is nothing wrong with putting these pictures in your family album and showing said album to visitors. However, if you circulate all the nude pictures among other adult males the circumstances do start to point towards to use of these pictures as child pornography.

You must be conscious about the heavy stigma that had developed around child pornograpy due to media coverage of incidents. This has gotten to the point where some fathers are afraid to touch their own daughters. It is important to insist that the fear of child explotation does invade and dictate other areas of life, where children can be naked in completely normal circumstances, where they are not being exploited.

On June 06 2011 08:16 TALegion wrote:

The more i read the responses to this thread, the more I feel the same way.
There have been issues probably 20x more important than this one discussed on TL that didn't get as many pages and responses as this one has gotten in one day.

On June 06 2011 08:13 Asjo wrote:


Saying that we all have feelings really is a moot point. As such, the ways society works creates many sensitivities. If people were socialized differently, they would feel differently about things. Our way of understanding things and reacting to them have their base in social constructs. What I say has nothing to do with equality, but simply how different situations would affect different people based on their bagground. No doubt that some boys could be affected gravely by this situation, it's just less likely. Just like it's less likely that the situation would turn into rape because the aggressors were girls. That doesn't mean that men or women should have different opportunities in the work market - it's simple something we judge on a situational bases based on our past experiences.

It seems like what you are addressing is not legislative part of equality, but the stigma that you can feel due to the socializaiton. That you're excluded from a group or treated differently because you don't exhibit the desired or expected behaviour in some way. I have no doubt that this can feel very unjust, and it's important that people are aware of the effects of something like gender roles. However, it's not something you can legislate. It just something you have to deal with by breaking the norms or otherwise compensating for what reactions you might receive in a specific situation.

On June 06 2011 08:24 Nanoko wrote:

I'm narrow-minded? Ok I'll bite, from what personal experiences have you concluded that this kid could potentially enjoy this, not related to you by friends, the internet, or anywhere else. What PERSONAL experience with being publicly stripped down by 3 other people and enjoying it do you have? You say that you're using your experience and knowledge, so knowledge of what? do you have a degree in child psychology? most likely not, were you as a child stripped down naked and had a video of it posted on the internet for thousands to see? Also the whole " he would certainly react vividly and show his dismay. This, as such, is what would serve to encourage to girls and also keep up appearances. He doesn't want it to be known that he enjoys it." thing....11 year olds are not Smart enough to have thought that out While being Assaulted, this isn't speculation, this is fact, Kids are not that smart, that's why Adults make the majority of their decisions for them. but no, this kid is obviously faking it cause he wants the sexy time with the ladies right? ofc couldn't possible be he is actually being traumatized, potentially for life or anything? not at all.

On June 06 2011 08:28 gold_ wrote:

I beg to differ. Who would be ridiculed more for this happening to them? A "helpless" young girl who can't defend herself ( Your rational thinking, all girls are wusses. Right? ), or a "strong" young boy who should be able to defend himself? This is going by your own thinking, the boy would be the one that would get ridiculed, the girl would get comfort and people to talk to.

On June 06 2011 08:27 Asjo wrote:


I feel exactly the same, which is why I'm trying to quell the people who scream out at any minor incident and want the legal system involved. I see it as decay in the moral fibre in society, because it clearly shows that people cannot relate properly to things, which causes debated and actions to lose proportion or purpose-oriented usefulness. I did the same thing in the topic "Cheerleader Removed for Not Cheering her Rapist", for instance.

On June 06 2011 07:54 rickybobby wrote:
she did the right thing to not press charges, stupid and wrong as this was they are 13 and should not be sent to juvenile hall or something like that just for this prank. Hopefully she has good parents and they will punish the girls for this, but pressing charges would not have been the right thing to do.

On June 06 2011 04:51 oogieogie wrote:

so if a 11 year old murders someone they shouldn't be put through or if the girls raped the boy? People shouldn't do stuff like this and not expect legal action to be taken.

On June 06 2011 08:38 Asjo wrote:


I think you must have confused my post with another, given your reference to characteristics "helpless", "wusses" or "strong". However, regardless of whether this is our intepretation, these characteristics need not be the most important ones in determining how we react to such incident. I pointed out some other factors in a previous post of mine.