Do you find this abnormal or anything?

hi Crazy BOB ,your only 18 ,a year and a half older ,thats no harm,if you saw a guy with your 14 year old sister HE was 20 you wouldnt think age doesn,t matter ,peace,

 

I'm glad it worked out for you but I was in a similar situation and I found it weird. I was a late bloomer so at 17 I was still physically developing and sleeping with a grown man. it was a serious relationship and while I didn't feel taken advantage of in anyway looking back on it now it was wrong.

 

lol lynsey i hope i didnt sound weird ,im gust saying what i think :& getting to love the threads I THINK IM ADICTTED, peace and LOL,litle minx,s,

 

Hey steady on people... 18 and 15 is no real big deal, if she is happy with it then its fine.

My first was 20, and I was 15, and I wanted too, I initiated, so I cant really see how another 15 year old would not be in a developed enough state to decide for herself.

Now, he should be careful, because yes its still illegal and it would be unfortunate for him to get punishedfor something that both parites consented to, just cos her parents pressed charges.

As for liking 11 year olds. They may look nice, but there is more to a woman than her 'look'. Its not much use being sexually attracted to someone who isnt ready to reciprocate and talking about the latest boy bands and who kissed who on school camp might get a little tiring.

I think it will probably change with age, but I would suggest that it is a problem if you are heading into your 20s and still have the same attractions

 

Hey Morality Police, leave my comrade alone!

There's so much abuse going on among adult "partners" also, does that mean that we should forbid loving relationships among them as well?

As the great feminist and anarchocommunist Emma Goldman once wrote: "Love, the defier of all laws, of all conventions..." If it's mutual, loving and nonviolent, then everybody else should fuck off. Btw., I was completely capable of giving consent and wanted it when I was 9. It's not rocket science, you know, even though our society has made it look that way.

THIS DOESN'T MEAN I'M DENYING THE EXISTENCE OF CHILD ABUSE, WHICH IS HORRIBLE IN ALL ITS FORMS. A "minor" (an adult is a major?) should have autonomy over his/her own body. That implies the right to say both no & yes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.home.wanadoo.nl/ipce/library_two/rbt/examination.htm - An Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Based on Nonclinical Samples - published in the bulletin of the American Psychological Association, but APA (strongly attacked by the omni-competent US Congress) later denounced it's findings (no analysis, no scientific debate, it just denounced it because it went "against our society's moral code" - the survey showed not all adult-minor relationships are necessarily harmful, some were even regarded as beneficial & positive by the younger participants)

www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume5/j5_2_2.htm - Antisexuality and Child Sexual Abuse

www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/mirkin_text.htm - The Pattern of Sexual Politics: Feminism, Homosexuality and Pedophilia

www.altpr.org/apr9/toc.html - try to get this issue of the Alternative Press Review

.....

State repression & control, sofisticating and increasing the scope of surveillance technologies (which are subsequently used on Internet activists, and the microchips that UK gov. wants to put under sex offenders skin can be used in all sorts of ways, can't they?) antisexuality (and a "sexual gulag" isn't very conducive to general freedom and free-spirited development), conservativism, scapegoating and strenghtening conventional societal norms through the construction of the Deviant (witches, fags, now nonces - subjected to mob justice or police regulation, should be burned, castrated, "handed over to Bubba" and all that shit) which reinforces group's moral cohesion and uniformity,buttering (and it's not vegan butter either the prison-industrial complex (which means getting ppl. off the labour market and thus reducing unemployment, giving lucrative contracts to private companies who build, manage, often even own prisons etc.) .................oh, don't worry, there's more. Basically, stereotyping (caricaturing) and dehumanising of these people supports some of the more reactionary and barbaric tendencies in society, all under a cloak of moral superiority ("the moral majority" - sounds absurd, doesn't it). Ever since I was a kid I hated when people used moral excuses (even if they were right) to dehumanise, humiliate and justify vengeance and brutality.



Today, people like Plato, Leonardo da Vinci, Novalis, Byron, Lewis Carroll, Oscar Wilde (he got 2 years imprisonment in the 19th c., today he'd get 20), Luis Bunuel, Paul Eluard, John Ruskin, Paul Verlaine, Walt Whitman, Langston Hughes, Andre Gide, Vincent van Gogh, Paul Gauguin, Picasso, Thomas Mann, Gustav Mahler, Benjamin Britten, Michel Foucalt, Pier Paolo Pasolini,Paul Goodman, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, Alan Ginsberg, Charlie Chaplin(...) would rot in prison.


In a nutshell (cause I'm off to contemplate about general strike and parallel (self-)government now), you should stop repeating what the mass media feeds you with, start doubting the benevolence of states which cage millions of people (even real molesters should be helped, rather than just responding to their sadism with some more sadism), rape children with their "educational systems" every day, don't have a problem with all the violence on TV, but dread humane, loving sex, think walking nude is "dirty", yet make idiots believe blowing children to pieces in Iraq is "noble and patriotic" (it's certainly legal).


Why aren't the state and the mass media concerned about approximately 35 000 children who STARVED today, and yesterday, and will tomorrow... "I wonder".

 

you are fucking wrong and sick. I didn't even know what sexual feelings were at 9 or 11 so for you to back up some feminist womens power by laying on their backs advocate is completley off base. Sure some girls reach puberty at 11 or maybe even 9 but to say that they are emotionaly capable of consent is crap-complete crap that you pulled to make your own sexual deviance appear okay because oh a woman said it so it must be right to lust after children

 

I couldn't agree with you more. An 11y/o girl doesn't have the emotional nor the maturety to consent to sex. On another note I'm the father of a 10 y/o girl, god help the 17/18 y/o that comes around my daughter, because it will not be pretty. Ya know this topic is fucking insane and I recomend the mod ban your ass you sick fuck.

 

exactly my point

 

I personally believe 13 or older is okay. 12-year-olds are just gaining independence, but still have a lot to learn and 90% of them regret doign sexual stuff that young, but I remember when I was 13, so many girls were already comfortable with being sexually active. I think once they hit puberty, wait a year or two at least.

 

And by the way, did anyone actually READ her reply? She said she meant to put "12",not "11", and I know it may not seem a huge difference to you, but stop saying 11!!

 

well 12 and under is a bit wrong in my opinon in general.... and even the 13's and 14's seem a little.... I dunno, destructive maybe? But hell man, it's not likely you'll be chaning your preferances.... soooooo.....

Live it up while you're still underage man, because you'll be in hell when you're 18 if you have preferences like that.

 

When I was in elementary school, my fellow girl class mates and I showed each other our stuff, and I felt very guilty at the time, even tho no sexual activity went on. Now, I wonder if some adults never did that at that age, and now want to.

No reason matters anyway, adults having sex with kids is not at all acceptable to me. Kids are impressionable, can be manipulated, and are vulnerable to the lies that sickos like the one above might tell them.

Nothing can excuse the abuse of kids, esp. bringing up spousal abuse? How the fuck does that make child abuse any less horrific, and if it doesn't, why the fuck say it.
sorry, i am still working on my anger issues in this area, and still feel like i want to kick the shit out of any molester I catch, sorry.

 

It makes me sad to get such reactions after trying to reach you on a deeper level than you'll get on Oprah. From what I read from you before, Lynsey, I thought you were a gentle soul, but your reply is more in the feminazi spirit. And I said I WAS capable to consent. Everybody has the right to decide that by himself.
I didn't just randomly use some woman's words (now it's forbidden to use such quotes because you hold the gates to Feminist Theory or what (and it's a broad Church, with the capital C put there with meaning)? Anyway, let me just add Emma Goldman was a wonderful woman who devoted her life to fighting for all people, not just so you can repeat some lame "girl power" excuse for thinking. She was also a personal friend to the great poet John Henry Mackay, well-known for his relationships with boys. O tempora, o mores!

Here's a piece by Kate Millet. She was a slightly more important feminist than you are, and I believe a slightly more informed one, too. Below is a petition signed, among many others (some of the best libertarian thinkers of the 20th century), by the famous feminist philosopher & author of "The Second Sex" - Simone de Beauvoir.

Kate Millett: A sexual revolution begins with the emancipation of women, who are the chief victims of patriarchy, and also with the ending of homosexual oppression. Part of the patriarchal family structure involves the control of the sexual life of children; indeed, the control of children totally. Children have virtually no rights guaranteed by law in our society and besides, they have no money ~ which, in a money-economy, is one of the most important sources of their oppression. Certainly, one of children's essential rights is to express themselves sexually, probably primarily with each other but with adults as well. So the sexual freedom of children is an important part of a sexual revolution. How do we bring this about? The problem here is that when you have an exploitative situation between adults and children as you have between men and women, cross-generational relationships take place in a situation of inequality. Children are in a very precarious position when they enter into relationships with adults not only in a concrete material sense but emotionally as well because their personhood is not acknowledged in our society.
Blasius: Do you think that a tender loving erotic relationship can exist between a boy and a man?
Millett: Of course, or between a female child and an older woman. Men and women have loved each other for millennia, as have people of different races. What I'm concerned about is the inequitous context within which these relationships must exist. Of course, these relationships can be non-exploitative and considering the circumstances they are probably heroic and very wonderful; but we have to admit that they can be exploitative as well ~ like in the prostitution of youth.

Kate Millett wrote Sexual Politics, Prostitution Papers, Flying, Sita, and The Basement.
=======================================================


Many years ago, many prominent intellectuals publicized a collective rejection of legislation based on moral panic. Today, protest of such import is inconceivable: not because the intellectuals have become convinced that all types of sexual behavior always do tremendous damage to everyone under sixteen, but because the people would lynch those intellectuals.

Here is an extremely interesting plea, published in the French newspaper Le Monde of 26 January 1977, signed among others by the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre.

"On 27, 28 and 29 January, Bernard Dejager, Jean-Claude Gallien and Jean Burckardt will appear before the court of Yvelines for the violation without violence of the chastity of fifteen-year-old minors. Arrested in the autumn of 1973, they have already spent over three years in custody. Only Bernard Dejager has recently benefited from the principle of the freedom of suspects. A custodial detention of such length for investigating a simple affair of "morality" where the children haven't been victims of the least bit of violence, but, on the contrary, have explained before the examining judges that they were consenting (although the law actually denies them any right to consent), a custodial detention of such length seems to us already scandalous. Today, they risk being condemned to a severe punishment of criminal confinement, either for having had sexual relations with these minors, boys and girls, or for having supported and photographed their sexual games.
We believe that there is a clear imbalance between the qualification of "crime" which justifies such harshness, and the nature of the charges; as well as between the old-fashioned nature of the law and daily reality in a society that tends to recognize the sexual lives of children and adolescents (when a thirteen-year-old girl has the right to the pill, why is that?). The French law contradicts itself when it acknowledges the capacity of discernment on behalf of minors of thirteen or fourteen which it can judge and condemn, while it refuses them this capacity where their emotional and sexual lives are concerned. Three years in prison for caresses and kisses: that will do. We will not understand it if, on 29 January, Dejager, Gallien and Burckardt do not regain freedom."

This statement has been signed by: Louis Aragon, Francis Ponge, Roland Barthes, Simone de Beauvoir, Judith Belladona, docteur Michel Bon, psychosociologue Bertrand Boulin, Jean-Louis Bory, François Chatelet, Patrice Chéreau, Jean-Pierre Colin, Copi, Michel Cressole, Gilles et Fanny Deleuze, Bernard Dort, Françoise d'Eaubonne, docteur Maurice Erne, psychiatre Jean-Pierre Faye, docteur Pierrette Garrou, psychiatre Philippe Gavi, docteur Pierre-Edmond Gay, psychanalyste docteur Claire Gellman, psychologue, docteur Robert Gellman, psychiatre André Glucksmann, Félix Guattari, Daniel Guérin, Pierre Guyotat, Pierre Hahn, Jean-Luc Henning, Christian Hennion, Jacques Henric, Guy Hocquenghem, docteur Bernard Kouchner, Françoise Laborie, Madeleine Laïk, Jack Lang, Georges Lapassade, Raymond Lepoutre, Michel Leyris, Jean-François Lyotard, Dionys Mascolo, Gabriel Matzneff, Catherine Millet, Vincent Montail, docteur Bernard Muldworf, psychiatre Négrepont, Marc Pierret, Anne Querrien, Grisélédis Réal, François Régnault, Claude et Olivier Revault d'Allonnes, Christiane Rochefort, Gilles Sandier, Pierre Samuel, Jean-Paul Sartre, René Schérer, Philippe Sollers, Gérard Soulier, Victoria Therame, Marie Thonon, Catherine Valabrègue, docteur Gérard Vallès, psychiatre Hélène Védrines, Jean-Marie Vincent, Jean-Michel Wilheim, Danielle Sallenave, Alain Cuny.

=======================================================
So ban me if you want. I like this company more. Partly also because they are all probably dead, which isn't such a bad thing I reckon. Then again, you're also one of 6 billion reasons (+ animals) why I didn't kill myself. And don't worry, the girls who broke my heart were of legal age

 

I consider your 'company' to be predatory abusers, who try to poorly rationalize the rampant exploitation of kids with some very rare exceptions to that.

BS.
I am not gentle when kids are used for adults lustful satisfaction, not gentle at all. Honest.

 

ahh its nnormal man. i like young girls too. juss remeber when u 18 the world wont be soo understanding

 

it is not normal to me, and I would suggest that it is predatory and sick for a 19 year old to have sex with a 12 year old, and very evil, in my view.

 

This is great, I don't often see such intelectual depth (abyss is a better word). Uh, have you actually ever heard of any of these people? Or is Dr Phil as far as your vision goes?

 

P.S. - concerning me being some evil justifier of child molestation - I spent half of my childhood suffering beatings from my peers for defending and standing up for all the weaker kids who were attacked, marginalised and/or mocked. Most of you were probably either a part of such aggressors' gangs, neutral observers who never raised a finger for others because you didn't give a fuck, or were just too spineless. If we were to compare, issue by issue, our views on violence, abuse, coercion and cruelty towards children, I am completely convinced that you would, by far, end on the crueler, more violent & more coercing end.


In any case, this issue gives a perfect opportunity to a few of you who see this as a great way to act "righteously", and without any nonconformist risk involved (a perfect combination).

 

heh taht's so funny because I am the least feminist theory thinking woman I know. just because I don't believe grown men should have sex with children (an 11, 12 13 14 15 16 17 is a child there's a reason the law is 18) doesn't mean i am not a 'gentle soul'. and it's not your right to decide 'for himself' in my eyes or the laws eyes so yeah basically fuck you for judging me when you are a sick fuck who thinks it's okay to be with 11 year olds.

 

yeah your post right here just shows how you don't know me or what i do. My entire job is basically ensuring that kids have the guidlines so they are not picked on and I have the power within the community, the city and the fucking country to change shit. I went to Vegas for a week last summer and helped literally write legeslation to change things so yes fuck you again you pedophiliac fucker.