GirlChat #592871

Start A New Topic!  Submit SRF  Thread Index  Date Index  

Re: What I think...

Posted by Dissident on Friday, April 18 2014 at 09:24:56AM
In reply to Re: What I think... posted by Rascal69 on Friday, April 18 2014 at 08:19:31AM

1. To educate them about sex. (Not a solid argument because learning by doing isn't necessary.)

I think this insistent belief of yours is very wrong, Rascal. Can a doctor learn to be a good physician by simply reading and memorizing information from a textbook? No, that's why they are required to take residencies before receiving their full accreditation. Can someone who reads how to fly a plane get a pilot's license and learn to fly competently without ever getting into a cockpit with a trainer? No, that's why hands-on training is necessary. Do we get a driver's license only after reading the book in preparation for taking the written test? No, we only get a permit if we pass the written test, because we can't get a full license and therefore full driving privileges without getting behind the wheel several times; and all of the above despite the risks entailed. This is just common sense.

2. Because you love them. ( has been proven for sure on this latest case i have read an article you guys posted about a girl as young as 6. We however shouldn't use that, as we never hear about the girl, the relationship was discovered when she was 16 btw.)

Then we need to ask the girl at 16 before making any kind of conclusion, as well as taking into consideration what happened after the relationship was discovered. Was she dragged into "therapy," forced to "repent" feeling positive about it by the social workers until she was blue in the face, etc.? Remember, the greatest expression of love is to allow someone the freedom to live their own lives. Attempting to do otherwise doesn't mean love is absent, but it does mean that the dark side of love - which can lead to controlling and possessive behavior - is rearing its ugly head.

3. Because they are sexual beings. (True as that may be what does it matter?)

That matters a lot, Rascal, and we as a society pretend otherwise at our peril. Those who have a natural sexual side will desire to express it in varying ways, at varying times, and with varying individuals, and attempts to suppress it rather than offer support and education on how to do it safely and responsibly only lead to the police state and surveillance-obsessed mentality that we have today, my friend. Which includes tween and teens - and increasingly younger kids - going to jail and on sex offender registries for life as a result of sexting with each other. This is not an issue that affects MAPs and MAPs alone by far. It's a much more encompassing matter than that.

I realize that having sex doesn't matter how old you are the risks are the same, the motives for you wanting to have sex can be the same as that of a young male. I just think its a hard sell for most people because you still have to at the end of the day answer the biggest questions on anybody's mind ( if they hear you out) is.

Yes, and at the end of the day here, I will indeed answer this multi-part question.

How do the children benefit from this?

1) Freedom of choice; emotional and physical pleasure; control of their own sexual and social agency - just as occurs when they are allowed to express themselves with peers. They are also free from legal harassment if they get caught sexting, putting racy photos of themselves on a socnet site, etc.

What good does it do?

All of the above, plus: 1) No more witch hunts in society; 2) Legitimate concerns are dealt with reasonably, such as every individual situation of this sort getting evaluated on a case-by-case basis rather than in an absolutist sense which cares nothing for nuance or evidence; 3) Less justification for privacy-invading surveillance; 4) More attention and resources given to and available for the many things which cause the largest degree of demonstrable harm to younger people every year (e.g., poverty; neglect; poor community design resulting in a huge amount of automobile-related deaths; lack of economic opportunities for youths; abuse occurring within the home; lack of sufficient medical insurance for youths; etc., et al.); 5) Less draconian legislation in general (such as the attempt a few years ago by the Australian parliament to ban all adult pornography featuring legally adult women with small breasts - you can guess the "logic" behind that); 6) Less insane laws, such as anyone going to jail simply for looking at a picture, or what they might have been thinking while looking at that or an otherwise fully legal picture; 7) No kids going to jail or ending up on a sex offender registry for all of the above, which is happening to an increasingly greater extent; 8) No innocent parents going to jail for taking pics of their infants naked that would have been considered cute prior to 30 years ago; 9) A huge decrease in justifying any type of artistic censorship on the basis that it contains imagery or ideas that a moralistically driven Supreme Court considers "exempt" from the protections of the Bill of Rights... Shall I go on?

What difference does it really make?

All of the above, and, basically, 1) A better and more secure democracy; 2) Less incitement to punish; 3) Greater encouragement to understand and learn, rather than a tendency towards widespread ignorance and quickness to judge others; 4) A greater appreciation for the concepts of freedom and the value of learning to "live and let live"; 5) Greater appreciation for tolerance; 6) More time and resources for LEAs [Law Enforcement Agencies, for the newbies] to look for truly dangerous individuals - e.g., serial killers, rapists, armed robbers, muggers, arsonists, etc. - than people violating cultural norms of moralistic propriety; 7) A lot less perceived need for surveillance in our personal lives; 8) Less fear and anxiety for many people in many different groups. 9) Greater happiness for younger people, who are no longer treated like status prisoners... In short: A massive difference.

I understand you need better treatment but do we need a lower AOC for that?

We can achieve various things without also achieving a lower AoC, yes. But if those laws and lack of freedom for young people in general remain mostly as they are, then we can look forward to the continuation of the witch-hunting, the police state-like surveillance, lack of freedom on all levels for youths (including they're being arrested for sexting and most forms of sexual expression, etc.), and the general disgust for what amounts to a natural attraction base... because the continued support of the laws on all levels of society (i.e., both social and political) require current attitudes to remain the same on many levels. If they do not, then questions on the other side of the fence will invariably start being asked...

Further, it's the matter of principle, as I always say. Keeping any laws of this nature intact is a smear on the face of democracy and liberty. As I noted above and elsewhere with many examples, it's far from only about MAPs. If you infringe on the rights of any one group of people, no matter who they are or how you may feel about them personally, the repercussions will inevitably affect everyone in society. Remember, if what they do to us and youths today remains intact, it will make it much easier for them to justify doing the same to mainstream homosexuals or women again tomorrow. Progress can and has gone backwards in the past when intolerance towards any one or more particular groups was began or was tolerated for the perceived "public good"... as just one example, look what happened to the homosexual community of early 20th century Germany who made so much progress there during the Weimar Republic after the Nazi regime took over and began its oppression of Jews. The rest, as they say, was history. And history tends to repeat itself when the same factors come into play.






Dissident





Follow ups:

Post a response :

Nickname Password
E-mail (optional)
Subject







Link URL (optional)
Link Title (optional)

Add your sigpic?