Crimes against children don’t ever need to be committed.

Has Japan changed a lot in the last 25 years? I was there in the late 80’s and I remember somebody in my squadron bought a Japanese edition of Playboy. It was funny because it didn’t show any of the girls below the waist. It contained nothing but above the belt photos…. and of course all those great articles.

Since then I guess it’s turned into the land of non-stop, anything goes porn.

This is somewhat true, but it also matters how socially accepted the material is. In Japan, they have “pornographic” manga on bookshelves of regular restaurants for you to read while waiting. It’s sold everywhere. People read it on the trains in plain sight. Obviously, they know that it is not alright to commit crimes against children. However, because it is socially acceptable to find proper vehicles for these urges, the crimes don’t need to be commited.

Is anyone frightened by the similarites between this occurance and those of the Red Scare or Salem Witch Trials?

Are they going to be asking this man to give up all his friends who own similar material (which by the way has not been determined to acutally be children and only look like children to the person that looked at it)?

I am a Yaoi fan. All Yaoi I own clearly states that the characters are of legal age of concent for this country but they look younger. So by that standard any one who looks at porn of a woman who looks younger than she is but represents herself as an adult would have to go to jail for the same reason.

If people actually looked at regular manga they would notice that most character are made to look younger than they really are. Naruto for instance has a character named Kakashi who is a teacher and is twenty nine. When you look at him he does not look that age at all. Another character is named Tsunade who is very elderly but uses techniques that make her look to be in her twenties. Should Naruto, which is a best selling manga in the US, be banned because Naruto has to train in swimtrunks during one manga?

I hate pedos. As a victim of several of them as a small child I can never have a normal realtionship with anyone and am single and most likely to remain as such. I like Yaoi manga for the main fact that IT CANNOT TOUCH ME! I am not male and these images will remain in pure fantasy where I cannot be hurt again. I know my reasoning is flawed but when you’ve had the same thing done to you then talk to me about it. Until then you cannot tell me what to read unless you start to wear a Swastika and are going to kill me for my own personal thoughts and beliefs!

Yes child pornography is wrong. Should it be punish. Of course. Is Pedophelia wrong? YES! Punish the jerk for touching a child. Reading Vampire Knight and the main character is showing a little too much leg means sending the artists and reader and publisher to jail. ARE YOU INSANE!!!!!!!!!! These are stories. STORIES! Apply you thought processes to romance novels. The book should be stopped because a character was a rape victim and has flashbacks of the incident which are described? Mystery books. HELL ANNE RICE! Armand was 16 when he was turned into a vampire. There were sexual situations for him before he was turned.

People need to see the facts and not follow the leader like sheep because it may be a threat. GET THE INFORMATION PEOPLE! THINK WITH THE BRAIN THAT GOD GAVE YOU and try not to revert to the past where people preyed on the different because it may be a threat!

“Within Japan itself, the dramatic increase in available pornography and sexually explicit materials is apparent to even a casual observer. This is concomitant with a general liberalization of restrictions on other sexual outlets as well. Also readily apparent from the information presented is that, over this period of change, sex crimes in every category, from rape to public indecency, sexual offenses from both ends of the criminal spectrum, significantly decreased in incidence.

Most significantly, despite the wide increase in availability of pornography to children, not only was there a decrease in sex crimes with juveniles as victims but the number of juvenile offenders also decreased significantly.”

From “Pornography, Rape and Sex Crimes in Japan” by:
Milton Diamond
University of Hawai’i - Manoa
John A. Burns School of Medicine
Department of Anatomy and Reproductive Biology
Pacific Center for Sex and Society
Honolulu, Hawai’i 96822, U.S.A.

Ayako Uchiyama
National Research Institute of Police Science
Juvenile Crime Study Section 6, Sanban-cho, Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo 102, JAPAN

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/online_artcls/pornography/prngrphy_rape_jp.html

‘Oh, I completely agree. I was just thinking of how sticking the “transgressive” label on harmless sex can create a “transgressive = sexy” reaction that lingers even after the rules get saner and itself labels non-transgressive sex (even formerly-transgressive sex) as “unsexy.”’

However, I should add that I *don’t* think the transgressive image of Practice X is the only thing that gives rise to transgression. There are passions that are, as argued above, are “hardwired” and therefore arise irrespective of what the culture thinks or doesn’t think about Practice X. In Platonic terms these would be the passions that are part of one’s soul, while passions that come about because they’re “trendy” would be those that are of a transitory nature.

More accurately, the psychology that leads to the majority voting for people who make anti-onscenity laws, right?

Remember everyone, “don’t care what anyone else thinks!!!” is many times a good idea but it’s not a good strategy for getting someone elected (and getting his or her opponents for the office not elected) in a democracy and/or republic.

“D’Orazio is correct in saying that the average ‘preaching to the converted’ argument is not going to sway the average Rotary Club member.”

I agree, she is correct here. Likewise, the “but it’s part of Japanese culture” argument isn’t going to sway the average Rotary Club member (”if they can have a culture we can have a culture too”).

“There’s nothing wrong with not being turned on by ‘transgressive sex.’”

Oh, I completely agree. I was just thinking of how sticking the “transgressive” label on harmless sex can create a “transgressive = sexy” reaction that lingers even after the rules get saner and itself labels non-transgressive sex (even formerly-transgressive sex) as “unsexy.”

BTW,

“…If a younger person can prove that they understand all the aspects involved and actually want the relationship, they could apply for a license that would allow them to be involved in one. You could have awareness and comprehension tests and everything in order to acquire one…”

I wonder how many of the people who are attracted to 11-14 year olds would be happy with such license-holding 11-14 year olds (seems kinda like emancipated minors IRL), and how many would instead still feel “I prefer 11-14 year old minors due to their cute, innocent, genuine, and playful nature that you don’t find with many women and license-holding 11-14 year olds [since being more comprehending and aware lets them be more worldly and opinionated for themselves - the less comprehending and aware someone already is, the easier it is for someone else to shape his or her personality and ways of thinking]”…

‘That reminds me of how some people seem to think ‘transgressive = sexy.’ It seems to be an effect of harmless sexual stuff like interracial marriage, love marriages, etc. getting labelled “transgressive” by racists, arranged-marriage fans, etc. Now these days if some people don’t happen to be aroused by breaking customs of their time and place (if someone’s only turned on by people in his or her own age group, if someone isn’t turned on by BDSM, if a couple want to save sex for the 5th date or marriage and be faithful to each other, if Phil Foglio doesn’t want to put violence and pain into the sex scenes in xXxenophile, etc.), some others dismiss them as boring vanilla pod people.’

There’s nothing wrong with not being turned on by “transgressive sex.” But the very act of society’s defining norms, based largely if not exclusively on majority rule, generates the potential for transgression, which in turn leads the minority to champion their thing(s), whatever it/they may be.

Nor was I, exclusively. I was addressing the psychology that leads to the making of anti-obscenity laws.

“I was addressing the clarity of the argument you praised.”

“Praised” is inaccurate. I simply said her argument represented the psychology I described.

“And I wasn’t making the hypocrite argument, I was suggesting the argument was fundamentally untenable.”

I’ll grant that you didn’t use the word “hypocrisy,” but you’re still neglecting the notion on which I later elaborated: that the “murder” in the Bible is seen as serving some instructional purpose. If anyone tried to suppress the Bible on grounds that the fate of the Levite’s wife is as gross as your basic SAW movie, then “redeeming social value” would be the defense offered.

” but it’s also ridiculously loaded and paints a crude picture of people in the middle on such issues. It implies that if you bring these arguments to the middle, you’ll be crushed because they’re ridiculous.”

Sure, the D’Orazio description is loaded. That’s why it makes a good example of the psychology I’m describing, and whatever her personal feelings, D’Orazio is correct in saying that the average “preaching to the converted” argument is not going to sway the average Rotary Club member.

” A few of them do end abruptly but for the most part people on all sides and in the middle have a variety of opinions and are capable of thinking through a lot of issues with which they don’t agree.”

But are these the type of people who stump for/support anti-obscenity laws?

Actually, I wouldn’t think it’s hypocritical. Preedom of the press belongs to he or she who owns one.

“…FYI, a second after I posted I realized ‘behavior’ was the wrong word and substituted ‘attitudes’. (Yes, as god of this forum I can do that.)…”

Also, that’s part of your freedom of the press!

“…HOWEVER, as I said…NO MORE NAMGLA campaign SPEECHES. We get it.”

The god of this forum has spoken, and spoken well.

Pandaman, you have chosen/had thrust upon you a difficult life. This is the point where Warren Ellis would simply say “Fuck off and die, shit eyes” and ban you but in a forum discussing free speech that seems a bit hypocritical.

FYI, a second after I posted I realized “behavior” was the wrong word and substituted “attitudes”. (Yes, as god of this forum I can do that.) You sure posted here very quickly.

You keep moving the goalposts. Child labor is bad, but age is just an arbitrary number where the kind of sexualized relationships you ‘re talking about are concerned? You can’t have it both ways. I’m sure some little kids would love sailing the seas as a commissioned officer. It’s all fun and games until someone loses as arm. The protection of children from those who would exploit them is basic tenet of the law as it exists now.

I wish you good luck with refraining from acting on your impulses, and commend you for recognizing that tghat is how it must be.

HOWEVER, as I said…NO MORE NAMGLA campaign SPEECHES. We get it.

News flash: not everyone is the same. Plenty of other kids that age are not having sex. Even some of the kids yanked out of middle school or high school, by parents who want them to be housewives instead, don’t want sex with other people yet.

“…This stuff completely goes against your argument that people who start or are going through puberty would not have any kind of libido, which is completely false…”

My argument is that not everyone going though puberty has his or her libido developed enough to already want sex with another person.

“…I really don’t see the point of you continually bringing up forced child marriages when I do not condone them or see them as morally right at all…”

Except when you praise the societies that make them normal.

“…Every single time I have said that it would only be appropriate if it was an actual consentual, meaningful relationship where both people actually care about and love the other person and could connect on many personal issues in a significant way…”

Not every single time. Other times you’ve praised societies that encourage child marriage as normal, and in real life many if not most or all of those didn’t and don’t limit their encouragement to marriages between people who actually care about and love each other. Ancient Rome, Greece, almost the entire history of Asian countries like Japan, many western countries up until the last century or so, all had marriage customs that let family patriarchs arrange marriages and force them against the will of the bride and sometimes even against the will of the groom.

“…There is far more that goes into a relationship than just two people wanting to have sex with each other, like I keep telling you…”

Of course there’s more to a relationship than sex. At the same time, this discussion has been about sexual media and sexual relationships in the first place.

“…If the 13 year old could not properly display that they had a decent understanding of what a meaningful relationship was and what was involved in it, then they shouldn’t be marrying the 23 year old…”

He or she shouldn’t be marrying the 23-year-old. Since he or she would probably be punished for not displaying “I want and understand this” if the people who have custody of him or her still order her or him to have sex with the 23-year-old (whether a marriage in exchange for a bride price or one night in exchange for a crack rock or whatever), age of consent rules that take child labor laws and the age of majority are needed to protect him or her from getting raped.

And now, the blogger herself speaks!

“>>>I’m claiming that past societies which did not have such problems saw it as acceptable and that there where many relationships where the girl willingly participated and was glad to be a part of it, as there still are today.

“And some of them also condoned slavery, the idea of women as property and other things we consider totally backwards today.

“In places where lifespans were short and resource scarce, early marriage was (and is) encouraged, yes, and often at an age we consider ‘too young’ today…”

Often at an age the brides themselves considered “too young.”

“…An older age for marriage is actually considered ‘progress’ by most societies, as is a non-reliance on child labor.

“Pandaman, you’ve definitely added something to this conversation, by showing us the thinking of some people who like this kind of material.
But please, this isn’t your personal forum for promoting your own version of NAMGLA. You rightly guess that many will find this whole sexual attraction to the ‘unspoiled’ a kind of arrested development on one hand, and creepy as hell on the other…”

Not to mention the obvious conflict of interest in being a significant chunk of the influence on the kid at the time he or she forms his or her opinions on adults having sex with kids, a la the dream posted here.

“…Society passes laws to safeguard children because they are NOT developed enough, mentally, emotionally or physically, to make informed decisions. It’s true that numbers are arbitrary, but you’ll find few people who think 11 is old enough to make major decisions.

“In fact I think you’ll find many of the people reading this don’t even think 21 is old enough to know what you want out of life. But you certainly have spent a lot of time justifying your own attitudes.”

Brava!

“…And as far as my behavior, what behavior? I have not had any such relationship with a younger person or attempted to do so…”

She said “behavior,” not just “sexual behavior.” For example, posting stuff is behavior but even though it’s not sexual behavior. You have spent a lot of time posting stuff trying to justify your own attitudes with examples of people who did have such relationships.

And yet slavery and woman not being treated equally actually have obvious logic and merit as to why they are considered backwards ideas. What I’m talking about does not. People merely hear of cases of child molestation or girls being abused and used for sex by older guys and groundlessly conclude that all relationships not meeting a certain age limit are wrong.

“In places where lifespans were short and resource scarce, early marriage was (and is) encouraged, yes,”

These where not the only places that embraced or accepted the concept.

“and often at an age we consider “too young” today.”

Which is a subjective and groundless argument.

“An older age for marriage is actually considered “progress” by most societies, as is a non-reliance on child labor.”

I am against child labor, certainly. I do not see any legitimate reason why a younger person who understands the concepts of relationships and can show a certain level of awareness and maturity should not be allowed to be in a relationship with an older person if they choose to.

“Pandaman, you’ve definitely added something to this conversation, by showing us the thinking of some people who like this kind of material.”

There are tons of people who like this kind of material who are not child molesters or collect child pornography or do anything that hurts children. There are many that even deny any real life connection or attraction. They are simply into anime and the culture behind it or are using a harmless outlet for their desires and simply want to be left alone, with the privacy and guarantee of freedom of speech and expression that a place like the US is supposed to provide. Nor just for the majority, but for the minority as well. And like I said, I know tons of other people who collect and are into this type of material. If anything, i represent someone whos views on the subject are at the far or extreme end of the fanbase, since I actually admit that the attraction carries over into real life. The vast majority of these people want nothing to do with the whole issue of pedophilia and child predators and don’t want to be seen as part of it.

“But please, this isn’t your personal forum for promoting your own version of NAMGLA. You rightly guess that many will find this whole sexual attraction to the “unspoiled” a kind of arrested development on one hand, and creepy as hell on the other.”

I merely wish that others like me would come out of the woodwork and express their views, so at least the general public would have a better understanding of the people they are going hysterical over and continually trying to demonize by whatever means they can. A lot of these people are a far cry from sex crazed, child molesting, creatures in the night type image that everyone seems to have. It is true though that there are people out there who get off on molesting and raping little kids, making videos of it, and distributing them everywhere. These are the kind of people society should be focusing their efforts on. With that said I did not mean to interrupt the general flow of this forum by posting what I did. I just wish more people could understand my position (and see that I and many others are not some despicable monster).

“Society passes laws to safeguard children because they are NOT developed enough, mentally, emotionally or physically, to make informed decisions. It’s true that numbers are arbitrary, but you’ll find few people who think 11 is old enough to make major decisions.”

But 18 is hardly the age where people reach the necessary awareness to make an informed decision either. Like I said, it depends on individuals.

“In fact I think you’ll find many of the people reading this don’t even think 21 is old enough to know what you want out of life. But you certainly have spent a lot of time justifying your own behavior.”

For some people they do not know what they want out of life at 21, for others they know much earlier, or are at least capable of understanding these kinds of situations and making decisions. And as far as my behavior, what behavior? I have not had any such relationship with a younger person or attempted to do so. And I certainly am not the kind of person who would try to take advantage of or hurt kids.

Look at this stuff. It seems pretty obvious to me that society merely wants to do away with all legitimate research and discussion of the issue in the name of preserving their groundless, ignorant, and intolerant views. Just like with every past topic that society was originally against.

And some of them also condoned slavery, the idea of women as property and other things we consider totally backwards today.

In places where lifespans were short and resource scarce, early marriage was (and is) encouraged, yes, and often at an age we consider “too young” today. An older age for marriage is actually considered “progress” by most societies, as is a non-reliance on child labor.

Pandaman, you’ve definitely added something to this conversation, by showing us the thinking of some people who like this kind of material.
But please, this isn’t your personal forum for promoting your own version of NAMGLA. You rightly guess that many will find this whole sexual attraction to the “unspoiled” a kind of arrested development on one hand, and creepy as hell on the other.

Society passes laws to safeguard children because they are NOT developed enough, mentally, emotionally or physically, to make informed decisions. It’s true that numbers are arbitrary, but you’ll find few people who think 11 is old enough to make major decisions.

In fact I think you’ll find many of the people reading this don’t even think 21 is old enough to know what you want out of life. But you certainly have spent a lot of time justifying your own attitudes.

If you read my posts, I explained the conditions where the relationship would be appropriate and when it would not.

“Hey, I’m not the one who first called you a pedophile and said you were sexually attracted to 11-14 year old girls when you’re 21 instead of 11-14 yourself, you are.”

I said I had the attraction and that society’s views of anyone being attracted to people below 18 would cause that person to be labeled as a pedophile. I never said that I would act on the attraction or said that it was morally right to do so if they did not understand the concept of a relationship and didn’t want it themselves without coercion. The current society’s views would also play a factor, as the person would be subject to a life of ridicule and being told that any kind of relationship with an older person was wrong, even if they didn’t believe it to be.

“I did. You said it in the context of wishing you could get away with shaping someone else’s growing personality to fit your desires than trying to find someone else who already has a full-grown personality that meshes well with yours, and praising societies where and when girls got married off early enough for their husbands to pick up where their fathers left off raising them.”

That is not what I said at all. I said that a decent person with good intentions could be more of a mentor type figure in such a relationship and have a positive influence on the younger person in that way. Again, you ignore the meaning and context of my statements and only apply to them what you want to see. And a decent person would not be trying to reshape the persons views in any way that they didn’t want them to be shaped or “get away with it” or whatever other drivel your accusing me of. And I was not praising such societies. I merely said that many existed in the past that accepted relationships with younger people. Not every instance of such a relationship would involve the older person parenting the younger or running her life or whatever. I do not approve of arranged or forced marriages at all, which again was not always the case in every past society that accepted relationships with younger people.

“Make up your mind, which are you claiming?”

I’m claiming that past societies which did not have such problems saw it as acceptable and that there where many relationships where the girl willingly participated and was glad to be a part of it, as there still are today. Dying at an earlier age (which did not happen in every society that accepted it) would not necessarily effect a younger persons mental state or rate of development, and the conditions for such a relationship would be the same. Think ancient Rome, Greece, almost the entire history of Asian countries like Japan, many western countries up until the last century or so, or whatever. They would not necessarily have all these problems you are describing, and such a relationship could easily occur without them.

“Meanwhile, it’s not just a Third World thing. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/feb/22/ukcrime.gender and http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/04/magazine/04berlin.html?_r=1 for First World examples.”

I really don’t see the point of you continually bringing up forced child marriages when I do not condone them or see them as morally right at all. Every single time I have said that it would only be appropriate if it was an actual consentual, meaningful relationship where both people actually care about and love the other person and could connect on many personal issues in a significant way. Yet you ignore my comments regarding this, misconstrue and deliberately distort any quote of mine you can, and continually link to stories of forced child marriage and incest as if they had any relevance to the discussion at hand. Why?

“Of course sex doesn’t have to be about reproduction. That is, among other things, one of the reasons why puberty is no excuse for a society to enourage adults to go have sex with kids.”

Society does not have to encourage anything. They just shouldn’t pretend that anyone under 18 is incapable of comprehending sex and relationships, having sexual feelings, being interested in the concept, etc. They also should not put a blanket ban on any relationship that does not meet their meaningless arbitrary age limit. So far you haven’t given me a single decent argument against the kind of relationship I’m describing other than society doesn’t accept it and bringing up forced marriages and the that girls that young would most likely be damaged by giving birth at such a young age. In the mean time, stories about middle school kids having sex are appearing on the news all the time, high school kids obviously are having it, etc. This stuff completely goes against your argument that people who start or are going through puberty would not have any kind of libido, which is completely false. Most people who start puberty also start to become aware of sex and start taking an interest in sexual matters, whether they admit to it or talk about it in public or not. How old where you when you first gained awareness or became interested in sex or sexually attracted to other people? For me, it was elementary school in 5th grade or so. And many of my classmates at the time also held an attraction for the gender of their choice and where starting to understand and be aware of the concept of sex. Maybe your different and didn’t discover the concept until you where like 15 or something, but that is hardly the norm. Obviously elementary school kids would not fully understand the concept of a meaningful relationship or all the aspects involved with sex, or have the mental awareness necessary for it, but it’s when that entire process starts, and it happens pretty rapidly. Not at 18.

“you sure seemed to be using the possibility of reproduction as justifying a society pushing kids into marriage that early. I responded to that statement you made.”

It wasn’t the possibility of reproduction. It was the possibility of a person at that age coming to understand sex and relationships and going through the process of gaining the mental development and awareness to do so. I was saying that there where plenty of cultures and societies that accepted and understood this idea and had many such relationships that worked out fine. Not all of these relationships would result in men wanting to procreate with them immediately or there being problems with girls being damaged by giving birth so young. Not all relationships would be the result of arranged or forced marriages either.

“What’s completely unfounded about knowing that some people don’t feel ready for sex with adults as soon as they feel ready for masturbation? I sure didn’t myself, and some other people (male *and* female) I’ve discussed this with haven’t either.”

That’s fine, but that doesn’t appear to me to be what you originally said. And again, not everyone is the same. There is also a huge difference between not wanting to have sex with some random adult and naturally coming to like someone and getting involved in a real, meaningful relationship.

“It’s not a groundless bandaid, it’s erring on the side of caution.”

You could make this argument for anything. Lets have a police state in the name of “erring on the side of caution”.

“For example, at the wedding of a 13-year-old to a 23-year-old it’s usually impossible to tell whether the kid says “I do” because he or she actually wants sex with the 23-year-old, or because he or she doesn’t want it”

There is far more that goes into a relationship than just two people wanting to have sex with each other, like I keep telling you. If the 13 year old could not properly display that they had a decent understanding of what a meaningful relationship was and what was involved in it, then they shouldn’t be marrying the 23 year old. They should also be able to show that they actually like and care for the other person and are not simply being coaxed into it. And if you really think about it, the kind of stuff your talking about can happen between people of any age. So and so person finds themselves attracted to another individual because they want to have sex, get married, the relationship ends up going badly, and they get divorced. It happens all the time and is one of the reasons why that doesn’t constitute a meaningful relationship.

“but literally can’t afford to disobey relatives pressuring him or her into sex.”

There you go again with the assumptions. The only aspects of the relationship that are relevant and meaningful is if the two people actually care for each other, can connect on an emotional level, have things in common, etc. Parents pressuring them into it should not be an issue and if that is happening, that is simply the fault of the parents.

“If the local authorities break up the arrangements just in case the kid doesn’t want it, but the kid does want it, the kid feels sexually frustrated for some years.”

Which is why the local authorities shouldn’t groundlessly break up any such relationship simply on the grounds that an arbitrary age rule isn’t being followed. And again, a relationship is about far more than just sex.

“If the local authorities don’t break up the arrangements just in case the kid does want it, but the kid doesn’t, the kid gets *raped*.”

If the “kid” doesn’t want the relationship, then they shouldn’t be having it and the older person shouldn’t be pressuring them into it. There are a lot of douchebags in society, but not every older person is like that. And really, why couldn’t a theoretical license type thing work? If a younger person can prove that they understand all the aspects involved and actually want the relationship, they could apply for a license that would allow them to be involved in one. You could have awareness and comprehension tests and everything in order to acquire one. That’s the first idea of how to deal with it that comes to mind anyway. In a country that claims to promote freedom of speech and expression, it seems better than a blanket ban.

I don’t see how this has anything to do with my argument…”

It has everything to do with your argument. Reaching puberty doesn’t always mean feeling ready for sex with someone else, no matter how normal one’s society says it is (and no matter how much that society pressures one to be married that early).

“…Nor do I want to have sex with kids asap or whatever ridiculous assumptions you keep throwing at me…”

Hey, I’m not the one who first called you a pedophile and said you were sexually attracted to 11-14 year old girls when you’re 21 instead of 11-14 yourself, you are.

“…Again, take what I said in context…”

I did. You said it in the context of wishing you could get away with shaping someone else’s growing personality to fit your desires than trying to find someone else who already has a full-grown personality that meshes well with yours, and praising societies where and when girls got married off early enough for their husbands to pick up where their fathers left off raising them.

“…Many previous societies have seen it as normal and have not had any problems as a result…”

“…Also I like how the sources your using to try and counter my arguments all involve third world countries who don’t have sufficient medical care or proper knowledge about many of the subjects related to sex…”

Make up your mind, which are you claiming?

Meanwhile, it’s not just a Third World thing. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/feb/22/ukcrime.gender and http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/04/magazine/04berlin.html?_r=1 for First World examples.

“Childbirth maybe, but most people understand and believe that sex and relationships isn’t always and doesn’t have to be about reproduction.”

Of course sex doesn’t have to be about reproduction. That is, among other things, one of the reasons why puberty is no excuse for a society to enourage adults to go have sex with kids.

When you said “Societies all throughout history and even today have seen actual relationships with younger people (and not just going after them for sex) as acceptable and even normal, with marriages for girls who are just starting or have started puberty (you know, the ages of 11-14 when someone goes through the natural development stages of being able to procreate) happening all the time,” you sure seemed to be using the possibility of reproduction as justifying a society pushing kids into marriage that early. I responded to that statement you made.

“…Your comment regarding girls not having libido upon reaching or starting puberty are also completely unfounded and simply untrue…”

What’s completely unfounded about knowing that some people don’t feel ready for sex with adults as soon as they feel ready for masturbation? I sure didn’t myself, and some other people (male *and* female) I’ve discussed this with haven’t either.

“…Society simply enacting a law saying that no one under a certain age can do certain things or have the mental capacity to understand them and therefore are not allowed to take part in these activities is simply a groundless, bandaid type fix for an aspect of human thought and behavior…”

It’s not a groundless bandaid, it’s erring on the side of caution.

For example, at the wedding of a 13-year-old to a 23-year-old it’s usually impossible to tell whether the kid says “I do” because he or she actually wants sex with the 23-year-old, or because he or she doesn’t want it but literally can’t afford to disobey relatives pressuring him or her into sex. If the local authorities break up the arrangements just in case the kid doesn’t want it, but the kid does want it, the kid feels sexually frustrated for some years. If the local authorities don’t break up the arrangements just in case the kid does want it, but the kid doesn’t, the kid gets *raped*.

Not everyone, no. But like I keep saying, this does not apply to everyone or even to the majority when it comes to your statement regarding libido. Childbirth maybe, but most people understand and believe that sex and relationships isn’t always and doesn’t have to be about reproduction. A relationship like I was talking about would still easily work even if the younger person couldn’t give birth without injury (even though the person would only be a few short years away from being able to do this). Homosexuals can’t give birth at all, and they are still perfectly capable of healthy and meaningful relationships, even if they involve sex.

That is the age when puberty happens now, and it’s been that way for a long time. Including periods when society saw relationships with younger girls as acceptable. Like I said, there are still counties in the world where the age of consent is lower.

“When and where average lifespans were lower than they are here and now, more people suffered from malnutrition and disease. Higher infant mortality dragged down the average lifespan a lot, being less healthy meant people who made it to midde age did age faster somewhat, and being less healthy meant children grew more slowly and reached puberty later, like the average age of menarche in Germany in 1860 being 16 1/2 (for details, see http://www.dg.dial.pipex.com/documents/plowden02.shtml and http://www.plimoth.org/discover/myth/dead-at-40.php ).”

That’s nice and all, but there where still plenty of societies that did not have these problems and still saw such relationships as normal.

“Also, in real life it’s common to not have all body parts grow at the same rate during puberty. I knew a kid who needed contact lenses in middle school and high school because his eye parts grew at different rates, then stopped needing them when all these parts caught up to each other.”

I don’t see how this has anything to do with my argument.

“Likewise, not everyone going through the natural development stages of being able to procreate has enough of a libido to enjoy sex with someone else or enough hip width to give birth without severe injury by the time her parents want her married and her in-laws want a grandson.”

I hear stories all the time about teenagers taking naked pictures of themselves and being charged with child porn, kids in middle school having sex, tons and tons of people in high school having sex, and so on. I wouldn’t necessarily say this stuff is healthy for these people’s development since it’s not being done in in the context of a genuine relationship, but it still happens all the time.

“At least you admit that not every kid enjoys being fucked ASAP. Meanwhile, I doubt that the majority of the time it’s harmless (see http://www.icrw.org/photoessay/html/intro.htm ).”

Your right, I never said that. Nor do I want to have sex with kids asap or whatever ridiculous assumptions you keep throwing at me. As for that website, that is not every case or how the lives of these people always turn out even today. Can an uncaring guy who doesn’t understand what love or a real relationship is marry some young girl, force to to quit school, give up her childhood, etc? Sure. But that’s not always the case. It is very possible for a younger person to be in a relationship, enjoy it and benefit from it, and still live a normal life. It has happened tons of times throughout history and even in modern times. Again, the main argument you have against it is based only on assumptions. If the older person is a decent human being who actually cares about the younger person, these problems you bring up would not be the result.

“No, homosexuality has a tiny bit in common with pedophilia and heterosexuality in that sense. It’s definitely not the *same* as pedophilia. Just ask every gay man who is attracted to full-grown adult men who already have full-grown personalities of their own, instead of complaining about them and wishing he could groom a boy to become his dream partner. Just ask every lesbian woman who is attracted to full-grown adult women who already have full-grown personalities of their own, instead of complaining about them and wishing she could groom a girl to become her dream partner.”

Like I said, I am perfectly capable of being attracted to adults. It’s just rare and depends on the persons personality. It’s just that what I’m attracted to is hard to find in adults. And I don’t want to “groom” anyone. Like I said, the person would have to display a good sense of knowledge and awareness of the subject and actually want the relationship on her own, without coercion for it to be acceptable or legitimate. In that sense it would work in the exact same way a relationship between two adults would work, only the younger person would naturally see the older person as someone they looked up to, etc. You can try and change the context of what I said all you want, but if your going to attack it I would prefer you take what I said in context, using only the scenario I was referring to.

“That sure seems to be it when you say stuff like this:”

Again, take what I said in context and only that without throwing assumptions at it. I never once said that I would see any kind of relationship where the the younger person did not want to be a part of it or did not fully understand the concept of a relationship as morally right.

The comment I made about society’s beliefs playing a role in how a person would think is a pretty realistic assumption and had nothing to do with wanting to change anyone’s beliefs on the issue. It merely means that if a society is more open to the concept than more people (including younger) within that society would see it as normal as well. If the society rejects the concept, then more (but not all) people within that society are likely to follow suit. This is shown by studying tons of societies throughout history, including the current ones, like I’ve already said. Sex and relationships are merely a human construct. They have been around forever and so has the concept of puberty, when a person naturally starts to take an interest in the subject. It is dependent upon the society and how they view the concepts regarding sexuality that determine their stance on it. The society we live in now just so happens to be in a period of hysteria over the idea of younger people being interested in sex or wanting to get involved in relationships. But the concept is still legitimate, still happens everywhere, and will always (and always has been) be a part of humanity whether any given current society wants it to be or not. Many previous societies have seen it as normal and have not had any problems as a result.

“It’s not an arbitrary number, it’s the age at which people in the U.S. and many other places gain custody of themselves and have a better chance of resisting coercion by someone else (like a couple of parents who have custody of a 14-year-old girl, so they have the right to keep spanking her until she stops disobeying them, so they can keep spanking her until she stops saying “no” and says “I do” to the “good provider” they picked to finish the job of raising her).”

That age is a pretty recent concept as far as when society deems a person ready to take on the tasks and activities carried out by adults. It is in no way a magical number when a person suddenly becomes ready to do all of these things. Younger people have proven in the past to be capable of handing many more responsibilities and tasks usually done by adults in today’s society. And a lot of younger people than 18 are perfectly capable of resisting coercion. Like I said, it depends on the individual.

“In real life, it’s based on assumptions that are true about how many kids simply do not want to have sex as early as someone else is sexually attracted to them.”

Assumptions. You cannot make a blanket statement saying that everyone under a certain age isn’t interested in sex or relationships, as it simply isn’t true. The issue is far broader and far more complex than that, even if you don’t want it to be.

“Once someone reaches the age of majority and passes the child labor law limits, that person has a better chance of getting a job (even if it’s a low-paying one) and moving out of his or her parents’ place (even if it’s slummy) and being less vulnerable to arm-twisting.”

That’s nice. But like I said, the “age of majority” has been many things throughout history, is an arbitrary age, and the age being 18 is a pretty recent concept. And like I keep saying, a person’s mental development and what they are and aren’t ready for or capable of understanding (including tons of concepts outside of sex) depends a lot on the individual. Not a magical number. Society simply enacting a law saying that no one under a certain age can do certain things or have the mental capacity to understand them and therefore are not allowed to take part in these activities is simply a groundless, bandaid type fix for an aspect of human thought and behavior. It does not in any way simply conform to society’s proposed solution just because they want it to. Humans are all individuals who grow and mature and gain insight at their own pace, with their own personalities and ideas, independent of how the people who make blanket laws want everyone to think or behave. Humans are not puppets, and this is never going to change.

In real life, puberty often happened much later than ages 11-14 for girls, no matter how early their parents wanted to marry them off. When and where average lifespans were lower than they are here and now, more people suffered from malnutrition and disease. Higher infant mortality dragged down the average lifespan a lot, being less healthy meant people who made it to midde age did age faster somewhat, and being less healthy meant children grew more slowly and reached puberty later, like the average age of menarche in Germany in 1860 being 16 1/2 (for details, see http://www.dg.dial.pipex.com/documents/plowden02.shtml and http://www.plimoth.org/discover/myth/dead-at-40.php ).

Also, in real life it’s common to not have all body parts grow at the same rate during puberty. I knew a kid who needed contact lenses in middle school and high school because his eye parts grew at different rates, then stopped needing them when all these parts caught up to each other. Likewise, not everyone going through the natural development stages of being able to procreate has enough of a libido to enjoy sex with someone else or enough hip width to give birth without severe injury by the time her parents want her married and her in-laws want a grandson.

“…I do not believe that the younger person in these relationships where harmed all or even the majority of the time, depending on how good of a person their partner was. I also don’t believe that there where never cases where the girl didn’t choose the relationship herself or enjoy taking part in it…”

At least you admit that not every kid enjoys being fucked ASAP. Meanwhile, I doubt that the majority of the time it’s harmless (see http://www.icrw.org/photoessay/html/intro.htm ).

“…It’s the same as pedophilia in the sense that its a sexual attraction (or orientation) that you where born with and can do nothing to change…”

No, homosexuality has a tiny bit in common with pedophilia and heterosexuality in that sense. It’s definitely not the *same* as pedophilia. Just ask every gay man who is attracted to full-grown adult men who already have full-grown personalities of their own, instead of complaining about them and wishing he could groom a boy to become his dream partner. Just ask every lesbian woman who is attracted to full-grown adult women who already have full-grown personalities of their own, instead of complaining about them and wishing she could groom a girl to become her dream partner.

“…Usually a girl at 11-14 isn’t going to of had her personality and ways of thinking shaped by society as much yet (as the years following are when a lot of that takes place), so theoretically it would give a chance for another person in her life to become more of a positive influence that would either take the place of society’s negative influences or a peer groups, or at least enable her to see many different things in life from more perspectives than she might otherwise have. That is essentially part of the appeal as well, serving as a mentor type person in a girls life and merely just being there for her, helping her out with her problems, sharing ideas, and so on assuming you both legitimately care for each other. I see it as a very romantic concept.

“I know you all will probably misinterpret that as me saying ‘If I was able to have some kind of influence on a girl then I would have the chance to convince the girl to have sex with me instead of society telling them not to, hur hur’, but that’s not it at all…”

That sure seems to be it when you say stuff like this:

“…How parents and the current society as a whole a person is living under view sex and relationships and how much they tell them and encourage or discourage about what they do with it plays a pretty big role in the persons development and thinking. So say a society that was much more open and excepting of the idea of relationships with bigger age differences (like many where in the past) would probably produce more younger people who fully understood the concepts better and viewed them differently…”

“…18 is pretty much just an arbitrary number and is not some magical age where a person suddenly gains all this insight and knowledge that they didn’t have before…”

It’s not an arbitrary number, it’s the age at which people in the U.S. and many other places gain custody of themselves and have a better chance of resisting coercion by someone else (like a couple of parents who have custody of a 14-year-old girl, so they have the right to keep spanking her until she stops disobeying them, so they can keep spanking her until she stops saying “no” and says “I do” to the “good provider” they picked to finish the job of raising her).

“…A lot of them are just ordinary people who simply ended up with a mind that thinks a certain way, stuck in a world that judges them as terrible people based on assumptions that are false and the way they think based on sexuality/sexual attraction that they can’t do anything about…”

In real life, it’s based on assumptions that are true about how many kids simply do not want to have sex as early as someone else is sexually attracted to them. Once someone reaches the age of majority and passes the child labor law limits, that person has a better chance of getting a job (even if it’s a low-paying one) and moving out of his or her parents’ place (even if it’s slummy) and being less vulnerable to arm-twisting.

When my state legalized gay marriage, a lot of old couples finally got married after decades of being in love with each other. Obviously none of them went “sorry, you reached age N, that means you’re not cute, innocent, genuine, playful, and pretty enough for me anymore, if you wanted to keep me you shouldn’t have grown.””

It’s the same as pedophilia in the sense that its a sexual attraction (or orientation) that you where born with and can do nothing to change. Ask any gay person and they will tell you the same thing. And I am telling you now, as someone who admittedly is attracted to (at least the concept) of younger girls, that it is something I’ve had for as far back as I can remember and can’t change. Sexual attractions are not things that you can choose and they do not determine what kind of person you are.

Also, I wouldn’t necessarily stop liking a girl just because she became older. The attraction is about the mindset and personality of the girl, like I said. As long as that doesn’t change, the attraction wouldn’t either. It’s the same situation as any regular couple. It’s just that the qualities I find attractive don’t normally manifest themselves in adult woman, either because of society’s influence on them growing up or other factors. Along with the other qualities in a girl that I mentioned being attracted to and seeing as important, it’s the view of sex as being more significant and meaninful and not something that should casually be done outside the context of a meaningful relationship. Most of the adult woman I meet don’t have this quality either. They have either been in many previous relationships and don’t see the concept as any big deal anymore, or simply just don’t see it the same way.

I hate how society views sex as casual and insignificant in general. Usually a girl at 11-14 isn’t going to of had her personality and ways of thinking shaped by society as much yet (as the years following are when a lot of that takes place), so theoretically it would give a chance for another person in her life to become more of a positive influence that would either take the place of society’s negative influences or a peer groups, or at least enable her to see many different things in life from more perspectives than she might otherwise have. That is essentially part of the appeal as well, serving as a mentor type person in a girls life and merely just being there for her, helping her out with her problems, sharing ideas, and so on assuming you both legitimately care for each other. I see it as a very romantic concept.

I know you all will probably misinterpret that as me saying “If I was able to have some kind of influence on a girl then I would have the chance to convince the girl to have sex with me instead of society telling them not to, hur hur”, but that’s not it at all. I personally was raised in a home school environment and never went to high school, and because of that my personality is different from the norm, in some ways matching the same personality traits and qualities that I am attracted to. It’s about finding a person you can relate to on a deeper level and find similar traits and aspects as you see yourself as having, on tons of different subjects and ways of thinking. It is possible for me to be attracted to adult woman, like I said, but they usually have to have the personality traits I mentioned and simply come across as more youthful, genuine, and maybe even slightly introverted. These traits are pretty hard to find though, and this along with my sexual preference and the fact that I never went to high school means that so far I have not been in a relationship or have had sex, or even tried to date.

As far as informed consent, I agree that it would require the person to have a good understanding of the concept of sex and relationships and the aspects involved, as well as have a certain level of awareness and emotional maturity. Going beyond simply the aspect of informed consent and into the aspect of what I would consider a good relationship to have. both people would also have to actually care about each other in a meaningful way, have things in common, be able to connect on a personal and emotional level, etc rather than it just being about sex. This holds true for relationships of people of any age.

However, some people are very capable of understanding these things at least to a certain extent far before they turn 18, and some people aren’t. It all depends on the individual person. 18 is pretty much just an arbitrary number and is not some magical age where a person suddenly gains all this insight and knowledge that they didn’t have before. I could of given you this same definition of what a relationship should be way before I turned 18, and many other people could too.

There is also a certain social factor involved. How parents and the current society as a whole a person is living under view sex and relationships and how much they tell them and encourage or discourage about what they do with it plays a pretty big role in the persons development and thinking. So say a society that was much more open and excepting of the idea of relationships with bigger age differences (like many where in the past) would probably produce more younger people who fully understood the concepts better and viewed them differently.

Basically what I hope to accomplish by posting this stuff is to give you guys a sense of what it’s like to see things from a different perspective. To understand that there are people out there who, because of their sexual preference, attractions. and beliefs, would fall under the category society dubs “pedophiles” whom they hate and demonize. But not everyone out there who have this attraction are sex crazed, child molesting scum like so many people seem to think. A lot of them are just ordinary people who simply ended up with a mind that thinks a certain way, stuck in a world that judges them as terrible people based on assumptions that are false and the way they think based on sexuality/sexual attraction that they can’t do anything about.

“Making to absurd rules makes people like Pandaman (who does not seem to understand the difference between informed consent and consent) sound sane.”

Like I said, I understand the concept of informed consent perfectly well. I just do not view any arbitrary age limit as magically granting a person that informed consent. It depends on the individual.

Nonetheless all of these things enrich the lives of the people who enjoy them, without violating the persons or property of anyone. But each of them also has a cohort fear-motivated people wishing to stamp them out, and punish anyone who enjoys them.

I have children too, although they’re teens now. I can protect them against sexual molestation, but my worry is that I can’t protect them against a state that might someday throw them in some dungeon for reading the wrong kinds of literature or viewing the wrong movies.

I don’t care for the kind of material Handley will have his life ruined over (in fact, LOST GIRLS makes me a bit queasy), but I do like other things that are on _somebody’s_ shit list, and I know my right to enjoy them unmolested is better assured when people like Handley, who have in no way harmed actual children, have their right to consume the material of their choice respected.

And most especially, when the notion that people should lose their freedom on the basis of future crimes they _might_ commit, is never seriously considered as anything other than a fictional theme.