Those sexually predatory 12 year old girls!

[Kristie]

They're trying to rationalize their urges.

Go fuck yourself, asshole.

Ohhh, Zilla struck a nerve....

[fishie]

How do we know it was moral strength and not physical strength that was the issue?

I'm not talking about this case in particular, but in general. Anybody who can't say "no" to a 12 yo needs to eat a gun barrel.

You realize that in other cultures, it is very common for a 30 year old man to marry and have sex with females as young as 12 and 13, right?

Yes and that is one of the most revolting things about the Islamic religion, as an example. Wanna align yourself with that type of culture?

I never mentioned Muslims, nor am I one. Nor are they the only ones who practice it.

So it's "revolting." Yeah sure. But you realize that's just your opinion and doesn't mean shit, right?

My opinion is no more important than yours in the wider stream of things. And no, Muslims are not the only ones who practice this. There are other cultures who marry their girl children off to old men. If you wish to defend this practice, that is your right. Just don't get all sooky when you are called on it. It's a revolting exploitation of GIRL children.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

They're trying to rationalize their urges.

Go fuck yourself, asshole.

Ohhh, Zilla struck a nerve....

I've seen this before, they struggle and struggle. Some fail to control the urges. Some stifle them for years. Still sick fucks at the core.

[Collector1337]

This is the kind of scum I'm talking about.

Go fuck yourself you mindless asshole.

Just because I challenge your perceptions and biases doesn't mean I subscribe to molesting children. It's a question, that's all.

You can't answer the fucking question, can you? You never can. All you do is sling insults as if it's obvious that you're correct about everything.

This is a valid philosophical discussion about sexual politics and law and I'd like you to JUSTIFY, using reasoned argument, why statutory rape laws should exist for boys and girls who are actual sexually mature men and women. Evidently you cannot justify such laws because you are only capable of resorting to insults and ad hom.

Which makes you an ignoramus.

Because Seth dear, there is a power inequality in play. Bodies can have sex either willingly or unwillingly. That's just bodies. But when you are talking about 12 year old girls and older mature men there is a definate lack of power on the 12 year olds side.13 year olds are not as mature and not as worldly as 30 or 40 year olds. 12 year olds may want to do any number of things that are not age appropriate. That's why we adults are required to behave like adults and protect them. They are children. We are adults.
The barrow you are pushing is full of icky.

If you read Lolita, you may notice that Humbert was the bottom in the power game all the time ... I suspect that this translates irl more often than the PC brigade will admit.

Exactly. They think that because it's a young female, the power differential is automatically not in their favor.

Except, too bad in real life, things are much more complicated than that and that's not always the case.

Dichotomous thinkers. Not much use in talking to those who engage in such cognitive distortions, often times.

[Collector1337]

I'm not talking about this case in particular, but in general. Anybody who can't say "no" to a 12 yo needs to eat a gun barrel.

You realize that in other cultures, it is very common for a 30 year old man to marry and have sex with females as young as 12 and 13, right?

Yes and that is one of the most revolting things about the Islamic religion, as an example. Wanna align yourself with that type of culture?

I never mentioned Muslims, nor am I one. Nor are they the only ones who practice it.

So it's "revolting." Yeah sure. But you realize that's just your opinion and doesn't mean shit, right?

My opinion is no more important than yours in the wider stream of things. And no, Muslims are not the only ones who practice this. There are other cultures who marry their girl children off to old men. If you wish to defend this practice, that is your right. Just don't get all sooky when you are called on it. It's a revolting exploitation of GIRL children.

I'm not defending it either. I'm just not being judgmental like you are and trying to ask you what gives you any kind of authority to decide what is right or wrong for every culture on the face of the Earth.

[Seth]

Because Seth dear, there is a power inequality in play.

Well, finally some semblance of reasoned argumentation. Thank you fishie dear for being willing to even consider the subject in a reasoned manner.

Bodies can have sex either willingly or unwillingly. That's just bodies.

Perfectly true. Willingly is called "consensual" and unwillingly is called "rape."

But when you are talking about 12 year old girls and older mature men there is a definate lack of power on the 12 year olds side.

There may be, but then again there may not be. That's what we're discussing right now, what if there is NOT a lack of "power" on the part of the 12 year old. What if the 12 year old is actually wielding the power, as in the scenario I suggest where she threatens to falsely report him to the authorities if he does NOT have sex with her?

13 year olds are not as mature and not as worldly as 30 or 40 year olds.

Oh, I don't know about that. I've met some pretty mature and wise 13 year olds and some incredibly immature and irresponsible 30 and 40 year olds. Don't you think it's at least somewhat relative to the specific individuals involved?

12 year olds may want to do any number of things that are not age appropriate.

What's age in-appropriate about a horny, sexually mature 12 year old wanting to be fucked? You do realize that something like HALF of all children in the US of 12 years are already engaging in sex don't you? So if they are sucking their 14 year old "boyfriends" cock, as it appears very many pre-teen but pubescent girls do, and that's okay and not illegal, why does the situation change ONLY with the change in the age of the person who's cock is being sucked? Keep in mind I'm talking about identical motivations and interests and "exercises of power" (and horny teenage boys sure have a lot of "power" over teenage girls it seems, but far less concern for their pleasure or sexual safety that an older, mature, caring man might), not cases of undue influence such as a father molesting his own child by using threats to coerce cooperation.

Given identical circumstances with ONLY the difference of the age of the suckee being changed, what is your rational argument in favor of one cock and in opposition to the other?

That's why we adults are required to behave like adults and protect them. They are children. We are adults.
The barrow you are pushing is full of icky.

Thank you. That was EXACTLY the response I was trying to elicit. I'm quite surprised that you gave it so early in the conversation, most times it takes forever to identify the ACTUAL objection, which is the "ick factor." And the "ick factor" is almost completely a feature of western social programming. And can you figure out where that social programming comes from?

Go ahead, I'll wait.

[Seth]

They're trying to rationalize their urges.

Go fuck yourself, asshole.

Ohhh, Zilla struck a nerve....

Not at all. I just judge that to be the appropriate response to his disgusting personal attack.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Strange, no replies from Seeth.

[Seth]

My opinion is no more important than yours in the wider stream of things. And no, Muslims are not the only ones who practice this. There are other cultures who marry their girl children off to old men. If you wish to defend this practice, that is your right. Just don't get all sooky when you are called on it. It's a revolting exploitation of GIRL children.

Why? What about the cultures (like India) that arrange marriages of boys and girls four and five years old?

We're not defending the practice, we're eliciting a reasoned argument from you as to why the practice is morally objectionable.

If the subject is to be carefully explored and knowledge is to be gained and imparted, then it's necessary for someone to argue the unpopular side of the argument, otherwise you end up with RatSkep all over again, where speaking an unpopular opinion is reviled and gets you banned because the microcephalic pseudo-intellects there don't actually have any reasoning skills, they just like to pretend they do.

This is where you and nearly everyone else fails in the rhetoric and debate department. You falsely assume that just because someone defends an unpopular, or unpalatable position that it must represent their true beliefs. That's just small-mindedness, ignorance and willful evasion of the debate.

Think what you like about the ARGUMENT, but respond in a logically consistent and well-reasoned manner TO THE ARGUMENT rather than at the individual who is defending it, because without that person there is no debate and we all just sit around jerking each other off.

That's not what I value in this forum or any other.

I want you to THINK about the subject and formulate a good argument that supports your position, not just resort to "that's the way it should be" pandering to popular opinion.

[Seth]

They're trying to rationalize their urges.

Go fuck yourself, asshole.

Ohhh, Zilla struck a nerve....

I've seen this before, they struggle and struggle. Some fail to control the urges. Some stifle them for years. Still sick fucks at the core.

Go fuck yourself asshole.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Seth,

The following posts contain direct personal attacks on another member.
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 8#p1482128
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 3#p1482123
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 7#p1482107

This is a warning that any similar posts will result in an immediate 24h suspension of your account.

[Seth]

If you read Lolita, you may notice that Humbert was the bottom in the power game all the time ... I suspect that this translates irl more often than the PC brigade will admit.

Well, sort of. He certainly allowed himself to be in a "near occasion of sin" by giving in to his urges and moving in with "that Haze woman," which placed him in a nearly intolerable position of sexual attraction to Lolita. But he did not machinate any of the early pseudo-sexual encounters with Lolita, like her sitting on his lap while he has an orgasm, or Lolita appearing in scanty clothing and making seemingly innocent physical contact with Humbert.

He did, however, both revel in the "accidents" and wished for more, and he most certainly took advantage of Mrs. Haze's untimely demise when she discovered his attraction to Lolita.

But even when he had his first actual sexual encounter with Lolita it was she who initiated it and took it to completion, and, gentle ladies of the jury, he was not even her first...

There was never any real indication that he forced himself on Lolita physically, though his spiriting her off in the car on an extended trip on the way to his new job was explicitly calculated to seduce her and give him opportunity. But Lolita appears to be a completely willing and avid participant who knew exactly what was going on and indeed used it as a lever to get what she wanted, eventually resorting to de facto prostitution by demanding money from Humbert in exchange for sex. So at that point SHE had all the power and Humbert was, due to his attraction to her, pretty much helpless to resist her.

One of the morals of the story is exactly the moral and ethical dilemma faced by an older man who allows himself to be made into a sexual pawn by a younger woman, and in the end he pays full price for that error.

[Seth]

Seth,

The following posts contain direct personal attacks on another member.
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 8#p1482128
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 3#p1482123
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 7#p1482107

This is a warning that any similar posts will result in an immediate 24h suspension of your account.

I await with bated breath your identical censure of Gawdzilla for his personal attacks.

[Collector1337]

Seth,

The following posts contain direct personal attacks on another member.
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 8#p1482128
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 3#p1482123
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 7#p1482107

This is a warning that any similar posts will result in an immediate 24h suspension of your account.

If you can read, you can clearly see that his "fuck yous" are actually a justified response since they are attacking him, and not his argument, essentially calling anyone who plays devil's advocate on this subject a pedophile.

So, if Seth is reprimanded, then it is only rational to reprimand those who called him a pedophile as well. Instead of giving those spouting the typical popular opinion a free pass. Unless this is repskep of course, then just punish the dissenters.

Something for the mods to discuss perhaps.

[fishie]

Because Seth dear, there is a power inequality in play.

Well, finally some semblance of reasoned argumentation. Thank you fishie dear for being willing to even consider the subject in a reasoned manner.

Bodies can have sex either willingly or unwillingly. That's just bodies.

Perfectly true. Willingly is called "consensual" and unwillingly is called "rape."

But when you are talking about 12 year old girls and older mature men there is a definate lack of power on the 12 year olds side.

There may be, but then again there may not be. That's what we're discussing right now, what if there is NOT a lack of "power" on the part of the 12 year old. What if the 12 year old is actually wielding the power, as in the scenario I suggest where she threatens to falsely report him to the authorities if he does NOT have sex with her?

13 year olds are not as mature and not as worldly as 30 or 40 year olds.

Oh, I don't know about that. I've met some pretty mature and wise 13 year olds and some incredibly immature and irresponsible 30 and 40 year olds. Don't you think it's at least somewhat relative to the specific individuals involved?

12 year olds may want to do any number of things that are not age appropriate.

What's age in-appropriate about a horny, sexually mature 12 year old wanting to be fucked? You do realize that something like HALF of all children in the US of 12 years are already engaging in sex don't you? So if they are sucking their 14 year old "boyfriends" cock, as it appears very many pre-teen but pubescent girls do, and that's okay and not illegal, why does the situation change ONLY with the change in the age of the person who's cock is being sucked? Keep in mind I'm talking about identical motivations and interests and "exercises of power" (and horny teenage boys sure have a lot of "power" over teenage girls it seems, but far less concern for their pleasure or sexual safety that an older, mature, caring man might), not cases of undue influence such as a father molesting his own child by using threats to coerce cooperation.

Given identical circumstances with ONLY the difference of the age of the suckee being changed, what is your rational argument in favor of one cock and in opposition to the other?

That's why we adults are required to behave like adults and protect them. They are children. We are adults.
The barrow you are pushing is full of icky.

Thank you. That was EXACTLY the response I was trying to elicit. I'm quite surprised that you gave it so early in the conversation, most times it takes forever to identify the ACTUAL objection, which is the "ick factor." And the "ick factor" is almost completely a feature of western social programming. And can you figure out where that social programming comes from?

Go ahead, I'll wait.

Ok I'm on my phone and its not ideal for splitting posts to answer. But never fear I will get back to this. Just as a teaser - females of all ages are not sexual sirens created to prey on vulnerable men, except in the bible or the Koran. Men are not unable to resist any sexual urge of any kind ever. They are better than that.
Ill be back