A Long Field to Hoe

Sunday, August 30, 2009

There are some people in society, which believe that children aren't really children or that they're not still in the process of developing mentally, learning about the world around them and who they can and cannot trust. These people talk of children as if they're 'miniature adults' attributing adult-like characteristics to them, in order to justify sexually exploiting them.

Society condemns people who knowingly exploit and take advantage of the naivety of children to satisfy their perversion, and rightly so. The GirlChatters however had difficulty understanding the difference between consenting, similar-aged teenagers exploring their sexuality, and adults who obsess over children, molesting and sexually abusing them.

Silentmist starts off:
What's the difference between a boy having sex with a girl, and us having sex with her?

Is our penis somehow more harmful to her than a boy her own age? Is our tongue somehow going to hurt her in a way I'm not aware of? Are our fingers more dangerous?

In some states there has to be at least a 5 year difference in age for it to be a crime for two people under 18 to have sex. This means a 15yo can have sex with an 11yo, or 16 with a 12yo, etc. Now I'm not sure about most of you (okay, I'm not sure about any of you), but as for myself, my penis didn't get any larger after I reached 14 or 15, so it certainly can't be that I would be "too big" for her.
Even in states which have Romeo and Juliet laws, they have a lower age limit. A 15 year old can't legally (and shouldn't) be allowed to have sex with an 11 or 12 year old child. Despite Silentmists warped understanding of the law, 'Lgsinmyheart' replies:
The only reason why there are laws on minimum ages is to deny body autonomy to the population below those ages. Close-in-age exemptions are only there because DAs know they'd have to put almost the whole country in juve if they actually went through with it - easier to prosecute just the older people.
'Little Girl Lover' explains what he heard in his sex offender treatment program and finishes with a comment:
They will tell us the 8 yr old is neither physically or mentally capable of a sexual relationship with an adult. They will be used for the selfish sexual gratification of the adult.

It's a long field to hoe before this way of thinking changes.
Dissident shares his distorted spin on it too, claiming that it's ok to abuse children, especially if they've already been abused before:
There is no actual scientific evidence that mutually consensual sexual activity between an adult man and a young adolescent girl would cause inherent psychological harm to a girl, but because of our society's attitudes that adults are supposed to be an authority figure to young adolescents and that introducing them to sex (or even having sex with an experienced young adolescent) is some sort of moral breach of decorum, such a serious breach that the police are called in to rectify matters.
Silentmist responds:
This has been my position for many years. I have always said that if it wasn't for societies mythical belief that sex is abhorrent until we reach a "magical" age, there would be NO psychological damage whatsoever.
...echoing a sentiment, similar to that of Reform Sex Offender Laws activist Bob Chatelle:
A child sexually coerced thus experiences that which he or she has been trained most to fear. In a less phobic society, there would be less sexual coercion, because all forms of consensual sex would be acceptable. And sexual coercion, when it did occur, would be less traumatic to the victim.
Society doesn't create the damage that these peoples actions cause and as much as they would deny it: pedophiles do only want to use children to satisfy their sick sexual desires.
blog comments powered by Disqus