|
A 12 year old child is incapable of rational consent, especially when it comes to such things as sexuality, which are obviously biological developments which are designed to only take place within the body late into maturity, a point at which nature intended for the mind to be developed enough to handle the emotional responses to sexuality, since humans are blessed with brains capable of enjoying such varieties of emotions, many of which are attached to sex.
But is 12 year of age also not approximately the age when humans first begin feeling a real desire for sex and could conceivably become pregnant? Although I'd view 13-14 as a more comforable lower limit 12 does work as well. It does at least in her particular case. What is there to handling emotional responses to sex when your views about it are not tained by the perverted delusions of sheep herders from several millenia ago? If a 15-year-old was acting in a world which holds that morality and sex are in no way connected do you think that she would regret that she had sex with a man at 12 whom she wouldn't have sex with at 15?
On the same token, it is universally agreed that a 22 year old man should have no sexual interest in a 12 year old child, not just from a societal point of view, but from a naturalistic point of view, considering the uselessness of attempted fornication with a child, and the human's nature to seek out meaningful and emotionally satisfying relationships. Therefore it is safe to assume one such individual who defies what is defined as normal, breaks the mold if you will, is most likely suffering from some type of mental disorder, going against what is typically instinctual to every other male on the planet.
He wants pleasure, she wants pleasure. That's the only way it needs to make sense to be valid. That society holds otherwise, well I'm well aware. But if you're trying to explain why the societal belief that a 22-year-old man should have no business with a 12-year-old is right then you can't point to societal disapproval as a reason. If you were trying to support a different point it matters not, however, mental illness is just one of those things today like demonic possession was back then--applied by laymen and dogmatic "scholars" to every minority they find objectionable as a useful label that instantly discredits them.
It is therefore safe to fear the results of what happens when a damaged human mind comes in contact with a developing human mind, such as a sick pedophile interacting with an innocent child.
It always come down to "sick pedophiles". Never have I seen someone so proud of his willingess to swallow whatever society tells him.
|
On November 14 2006 15:44 NewbSaibot wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2006 15:18 Hippopotamus wrote: The guy before you was a bit sharper, he noticed there is a connection between the two. And yet again, language language language. You're so caught up in the labels you attach to these things. "rape", "petty crime", "abuse". Using words like that you'll never see anything except someone who needs professional help. Why don't we get it down to simply putting a penis into a vagina? Can you explain to me from the act up instead of from your beliefs down why it would be wrong for a 22-year-old man to put his penis in the vagina of a 12-year-old girl who consented to it ? A 12 year old child is incapable of rational consent, especially when it comes to such things as sexuality, which are obviously biological developments which are designed to only take place within the body late into maturity, a point at which nature intended for the mind to be developed enough to handle the emotional responses to sexuality, since humans are blessed with brains capable of enjoying such varieties of emotions, many of which are attached to sex. On the same token, it is universally agreed that a 22 year old man should have no sexual interest in a 12 year old child, not just from a societal point of view, but from a naturalistic point of view, considering the uselessness of attempted fornication with a child, and the human's nature to seek out meaningful and emotionally satisfying relationships. Therefore it is safe to assume one such individual who defies what is defined as normal, breaks the mold if you will, is most likely suffering from some type of mental disorder, going against what is typically instinctual to every other male on the planet. It is therefore safe to fear the results of what happens when a damaged human mind comes in contact with a developing human mind, such as a sick pedophile interacting with an innocent child.
So im assuming you are totally against gays especially if they come in contact with a developing mind..., otherwise you are an hypocrit scumbag.
orly, i didnt know NATURE mentally prepared girls to have sex at 18... its weird considering that time ago 13yo girls were already married and having sex, with no awful traumas.
The trauma comes from society not from the nature of the act and i totally agree with hipopotamus, in a far future they will laugh at us for things like this.
|
yep, very sick, from both parties... not only the girl, but more so the guy, should have known better... more sense... obviously not.
|
United Kingdom10598 Posts
|
Wait, so the girl wanted the guy in her room? I thought he threatened her or something! This is getting weirder by the moment. :S
|
lol, and i like hippopotamus replies, so true!
|
This is not possible. Taybe the parents knew it.. otherwise it seems impossible. The girl cannot stay so much in her own room for crying out loud! Assuming that this is real: @ entropy you start with wrong ideeas first this is not a rape.. i don't believe it can be pedophilia because most girls at 12 years are pretty "evolved" meaning most of them are physically able to have sex this is children (minor) coruption
Another point of view that is not taken into discussion is that everyone is different. Every human being has a different metabolism. I'll give you the examply of gipsys (hope they die... call me hittler, i don't like them at all): - They life is an average 40-50year while a romanian is 74 - They develop much faster, a gipsy girl's first menstruation is in average at the age of 8. - Not only sexually, but they mature alot faster than the rest of the people. I see them everyday... they look at 12 like most of us look (or should) at 18. - They MARRY at ~12years because beside their culture it is in their metabolism. The UE makes big mouth about the problem but they do not understand that they have a much faster metabolism than ours.
A 12 year old child is incapable of rational consent, especially when it comes to such things as sexuality, which are obviously biological developments which are designed to only take place within the body late into maturity, a point at which nature intended for the mind to be developed enough to handle the emotional responses to sexuality, since humans are blessed with brains capable of enjoying such varieties of emotions, many of which are attached to sex.
Many girls have a metabolsim that makes them fully capable of having sexual intercourse at 12 years old. The problem remains that their mind is not capable of understanding everything and taking decisions. That is why minor coruptions are punished and the minors are protected by laws.
From its Greek roots, pedophilia implies love of a child ("paidos" + "philia"). In practice, pedophiles are typically adult males with exclusive sexual preferences for prepubescent boys and/or girls. Adult women can be diagnosed as pedophiles as well as some postpubertal adolescents. Pedophilia is not synonomous with child molestation ( pedophilia being a subcategory of child molestation). There are clear and specific criteria for diagnosing pedophilia in the DSM.
Now i will explain you what pedophilia means practically not only theoretically. I made 1 week practice (for university, and i must make more) at a children assistance center. My "job" was to talk with children and to observate, analyze them plus to see how graduated psychologists handle them and their troubles. There were many sexually and not only, abused children, mostly by their own parents, yes you read this good, MOST OF ABUSES like 70% ARE DONE BY CHILDREN'S RELATIVES!!! I learned from the "teachers" about pedophilia because it was pretty common. I remember one uncle who sexually abused his 4 years niece, and a case where both parents (most of them are done by low people, meaning low cultured, low inteligence, low life standard etc) severaly abused their 7 year daughter (this was discovered after the girl was taken last year into emergency at hospital because of a bad hemoragia caused by different objects her parents introduced into her anus). Now this is pedophilia. None of those children are able to have sexual intercourse. Their genital organs are not able to sustain such an activity. That is what a pedophile is atracted to. THAT is pedophilia. Maybe you should also read this http://www.minddisorders.com/Ob-Ps/Pedophilia.html
The problem over here is that because of over saturation with porn/erotic materials almost everywhere (*points to the tv and newspaper*) and the lack of sexual education from parents or teachers, the children by curiosity tends to accept this kind of things.
For stupid people (there are some) who think i'm defending pedophilles of children abusing, i DO NOT at all, i only try to show you that most things are not what they look. And to stop this "pedo" bandwagoning i've seen in some threads i tried to explain you what pedophilia means.
|
On November 14 2006 16:15 Hippopotamus wrote: But is 12 year of age also not approximately the age when humans first begin feeling a real desire for sex and could conceivably become pregnant? No.
Although I'd view 13-14 as a more comforable lower limit 12 does work as well. It does at least in her particular case. What do you mean "it does in her particular case"?
What is there to handling emotional responses to sex when your views about it are not tained by the perverted delusions of sheep herders from several millenia ago? If a 15-year-old was acting in a world which holds that morality and sex are in no way connected do you think that she would regret that she had sex with a man at 12 whom she wouldn't have sex with at 15?
I dont consider 15 year old's capable of rational thought either, so it doesnt really matter what array of emotions he/she might feel.
He wants pleasure, she wants pleasure. That's the only way it needs to make sense to be valid. That society holds otherwise, well I'm well aware. But if you're trying to explain why the societal belief that a 22-year-old man should have no business with a 12-year-old is right then you can't point to societal disapproval as a reason. If you were trying to support a different point it matters not, however, mental illness is just one of those things today like demonic possession was back then--applied by laymen and dogmatic "scholars" to every minority they find objectionable as a useful label that instantly discredits them. She doesnt know what she wants. And this pleasure goes beyond the simple physical bounds you are attempting to attach to it. Humans are more than just animals. The feeling of love is not something learned, it is instinctual to us. Here's where it gets tricky. You are still stuck in the belief that everything about a human is learned behavior, including a man's interest in a child as a sexual partner, and a child's "interest" in an adult for what little they know of sexual behavior. Until you overcome this roadblock, you will have a hard time understanding the natural boundaries i am claiming human's possess which are in fact not learned behaviors, but rather instincts inserted into our brains for our own protection in events we otherwise have difficulty contemplating on. Do you believe in instincts?
It always come down to "sick pedophiles". Never have I seen someone so proud of their willingness to swallow whatever society tells them. It's not something society as taught me. When i see a child, i dont see any possibility for sexual arousal. To me i see nothing more than what is tantamount to an inanimate object, a cardboard box, a bicycle leaning against a wall, a shoe on the floor. Just random, pick any object which stirs no emotions in you whatsoever. And when i force upon myself the idea of being aroused by a child, i become sick. To me, it is like trying to convince myself that the shit i just dropped in the toilet tastes good, and that i should eat it. Or that i should take this hammer and hit my hand with it. The idea brings disgust, pain, annoyance, anger, and avoidance above all.
|
That is EXTREMELY odd that no one noticed that entire time.
|
On November 14 2006 16:37 sith wrote: That is EXTREMELY odd that no one noticed that entire time.
What are you implying?
|
On November 14 2006 16:17 baal wrote: So im assuming you are totally against gays especially if they come in contact with a developing mind..., otherwise you are an hypocrit scumbag.
orly, i didnt know NATURE mentally prepared girls to have sex at 18... its weird considering that time ago 13yo girls were already married and having sex, with no awful traumas.
The trauma comes from society not from the nature of the act and i totally agree with hipopotamus, in a far future they will laugh at us for things like this. I should have been a little more specific. Im not against gays coming in "contact" with straight children, because i see no risk in simple contact. Same with pedophiles. If i shake a pedophiles hand, i have made contact, but i am in no way hurt. I wouldnt necessarily mind my own child shaking hands with one either. What i meant by contact was sustained prolonged mental engagement.
Pedophiles have a shared history of events in their lives which are usually traumatic, painful, or otherwise damaging both physically and mentally which are directly responsible for their condition. History has shown that individuals who have suffered these types of abuse in their lives are generally unstable and often dangerous people to be around. This is why I object to having a pedophile come in contact with children or anyone else for that matter. However homosexuals have no such histories of trauma (since they are born that way), and as such have no such histories of violent or erratic or dangerous behavior that could harm others such as children. This is why i would have no objection to any kind of mental contact between homosexuals and children, so long as it fell between the guidelines of what most accept as proper interaction between adults and children of any sex/religion/occupation/sexual preference.
|
sex is just sex....... i mean, u done it once, u do it mutliple times, and if ur lucky, with multiple partners, hoping u dont get sti's.. if this story is to be true... im sure the girl would have some kind of understanding. yeah 12 is very young... most girls mature quite fast... and by 12, should have a lil understanding of yes, and no, right or wrong.. however, im not sticking up for the 22 year old, i think its sick he cant socialise with women his own age. 12 is just low. and deffinatley wrong, but i think both here are in the wrong.....
|
On November 14 2006 16:42 NewbSaibot wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2006 16:17 baal wrote: So im assuming you are totally against gays especially if they come in contact with a developing mind..., otherwise you are an hypocrit scumbag.
orly, i didnt know NATURE mentally prepared girls to have sex at 18... its weird considering that time ago 13yo girls were already married and having sex, with no awful traumas.
The trauma comes from society not from the nature of the act and i totally agree with hipopotamus, in a far future they will laugh at us for things like this. I should have been a little more specific. Im not against gays coming in "contact" with straight children, because i see no risk in simple contact. Same with pedophiles. If i shake a pedophiles hand, i have made contact, but i am in no way hurt. I wouldnt necessarily mind my own child shaking hands with one either. What i meant by contact was sustained prolonged mental engagement. Pedophiles have a shared history of events in their lives which are usually traumatic, painful, or otherwise damaging both physically and mentally which are directly responsible for their condition. History has shown that individuals who have suffered these types of abuse in their lives are generally unstable and often dangerous people to be around. This is why I object to having a pedophile come in contact with children or anyone else for that matter. However homosexuals have no such histories of trauma (since they are born that way), and as such have no such histories of violent or erratic or dangerous behavior that could harm others such as children. This is why i would have no objection to any kind of mental contact between homosexuals and children, so long as it fell between the guidelines of what most accept as proper interaction between adults and children of any sex/religion/occupation/sexual preference.
So you agree with gay couples adopting children? What sort of a role model is a homosexual man? Can someone get some statistics of the futures of these adopted children?
|
On November 14 2006 16:17 baal wrote: orly, i didnt know NATURE mentally prepared girls to have sex at 18... its weird considering that time ago 13yo girls were already married and having sex, with no awful traumas. Do you honestly think society was in a better, and mentally healthier state 500 years ago? Compare our culture today with our culture then. Who's to say what contributed to what? Just because some people raped a few children without objection does not make it ok or any less damaging. You act as if this was common place. Sure it happened, more than today, but only because it was allowed to. You could also blow a man away for stealing your bread, or burned at the stake for performing a card trick. Should that be once again allowed too? Whatever instances pedophilia took place in yesteryear were still far outweighed by mature adult+adult relationships.
The trauma comes from society not from the nature of the act and i totally agree with hipopotamus, in a far future they will laugh at us for things like this. Yes, in the future every 40 year old man will have a sweet flat chested 12 year old girl blowing him and all laugh at how insecure we were in our past.
|
On November 14 2006 16:46 vinsc wrote: So you agree with gay couples adopting children? What sort of a role model is a homosexual man? Can someone get some statistics of the futures of these adopted children?
Yes i have no problem with it. Sex comes last in a child's observation of their parents interaction with each other. Every other facet of interaction between homosexuals as non-homosexuals (whats the fuckin word for this? i know there is one) is the same. So there are no mis-learned behavior that could cause them problems as they grow and become self-sufficient.
|
On November 14 2006 16:50 NewbSaibot wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2006 16:17 baal wrote: orly, i didnt know NATURE mentally prepared girls to have sex at 18... its weird considering that time ago 13yo girls were already married and having sex, with no awful traumas. Do you honestly think society was in a better, and mentally healthier state 500 years ago? Compare our culture today with our culture then. Who's to say what contributed to what? Just because some people raped a few children without objection does not make it ok or any less damaging. You act as if this was common place. Sure it happened, more than today, but only because it was allowed to. You could also blow a man away for stealing your bread, or burned at the stake for performing a card trick. Should that be once again allowed too? Whatever instances pedophilia took place in yesteryear were still far outweighed by mature adult+adult relationships.
Now youa re just rubbing your ignorance all over the thread, some people did it? some could? you idiot, that was the commong thing to do, a 20yo woman was too old to marry.
Society doesnt improve, it just adapts at a slower rate than individuals, for example we are used to reproduce as monkeys, the world is overpopulated now, and society is slowly adapting to this by having less and less children, also society's behavor is ciclical from puritanism to decadency.
Rome were an extremely sexually open society, much more than it is today and todays society is much more open than it was 100 years ago, its just a cycle.
also stop pulling facts out of your ass, since when all pedophiles have history of traumatic experiences while they were young?, yeah there are some and turned into pedophiles because of that, so are gays that turned into gays because of traumatic experiences.
|
No.
What do you mean "it does in her particular case"? Refer to Pika Chu's post, he explains both of those.
I dont consider 15 year old's capable of rational thought either, so it doesnt really matter what array of emotions he/she might feel.
This is where it starts to get interesting... really interesting. But do not nitpick my point, if you don't think 15 is rational bump it up to whatever you consider to be rational. My point does not rely on the particular age of the person.
She doesnt know what she wants. And this pleasure goes beyond the simple physical bounds you are attempting to attach to it. Humans are more than just animals. The feeling of love is not something learned, it is instinctual to us. Here's where it gets tricky. You are still stuck in the belief that everything about a human is learned behavior, including a man's interest in a child as a sexual partner, and a child's "interest" in an adult for what little they know of sexual behavior. Until you overcome this roadblock, you will have a hard time understanding the natural boundaries i am claiming human's possess which are in fact not learned behaviors, but rather instincts inserted into our brains for our own protection in events we otherwise have difficulty contemplating on. Do you believe in instincts?
I believe in instincts, I just don't believe in the ones that are conjured out of thin air to justify things.
It's not something society as taught me. When i see a child, i dont see any possibility for sexual arousal. To me i see nothing more than what is tantamount to an inanimate object, a cardboard box, a bicycle leaning against a wall, a shoe on the floor. Just random, pick any object which stirs no emotions in you whatsoever. And when i force upon myself the idea of being aroused by a child, i become sick. To me, it is like trying to convince myself that the shit i just dropped in the toilet tastes good, and that i should eat it. Or that i should take this hammer and hit my hand with it. The idea brings disgust, pain, annoyance, anger, and avoidance above all.
+ Show Spoiler +I'm going to hell for this and so is my credibility, but it makes the point clear
Pedophiles have a shared history of events in their lives which are usually traumatic, painful, or otherwise damaging both physically and mentally which are directly responsible for their condition. History has shown that individuals who have suffered these types of abuse in their lives are generally unstable and often dangerous people to be around. This is why I object to having a pedophile come in contact with children or anyone else for that matter. However homosexuals have no such histories of trauma (since they are born that way), and as such have no such histories of violent or erratic or dangerous behavior that could harm others such as children. This is why i would have no objection to any kind of mental contact between homosexuals and children, so long as it fell between the guidelines of what most accept as proper interaction between adults and children of any sex/religion/occupation/sexual preference.
Refer to Pika Chu's post. It's acceptable to use pedophile as common term as we have been doing all along, but when you are writing something like this you are dealing with something quite different from what we're talking about. You are misusing the professional and the common definitions of this word.
|
Korea (South)11558 Posts
On November 14 2006 16:46 vinsc wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2006 16:42 NewbSaibot wrote:On November 14 2006 16:17 baal wrote: So im assuming you are totally against gays especially if they come in contact with a developing mind..., otherwise you are an hypocrit scumbag.
orly, i didnt know NATURE mentally prepared girls to have sex at 18... its weird considering that time ago 13yo girls were already married and having sex, with no awful traumas.
The trauma comes from society not from the nature of the act and i totally agree with hipopotamus, in a far future they will laugh at us for things like this. I should have been a little more specific. Im not against gays coming in "contact" with straight children, because i see no risk in simple contact. Same with pedophiles. If i shake a pedophiles hand, i have made contact, but i am in no way hurt. I wouldnt necessarily mind my own child shaking hands with one either. What i meant by contact was sustained prolonged mental engagement. Pedophiles have a shared history of events in their lives which are usually traumatic, painful, or otherwise damaging both physically and mentally which are directly responsible for their condition. History has shown that individuals who have suffered these types of abuse in their lives are generally unstable and often dangerous people to be around. This is why I object to having a pedophile come in contact with children or anyone else for that matter. However homosexuals have no such histories of trauma (since they are born that way), and as such have no such histories of violent or erratic or dangerous behavior that could harm others such as children. This is why i would have no objection to any kind of mental contact between homosexuals and children, so long as it fell between the guidelines of what most accept as proper interaction between adults and children of any sex/religion/occupation/sexual preference. So you agree with gay couples adopting children? What sort of a role model is a homosexual man? Can someone get some statistics of the futures of these adopted children?
I actually watched a documentary on gay couples having children. Most of them were females who would live with eachother. Most of the times, the birth mother would stay the mother, as the other would be an "aunt". And the children would assume that would be the case until they grew older and started to realize things. Many times the children just plainly didn't care. It didn't make them homosexual in any way, since homosexuality is infact in the genes of the person (not hereditary, instead an implication that occured during cells reproducing while the child is still fertalizing inside the womb of the mother).
The children obviously had two mothers or two fathers. They obviously would not become homophobic because they grew up in direct contact with homosexuals their entire childhood, and reazlied that homosexuals are no different in the mindset of non-homosexuals. They had the same problems in life, they all eat the same stuff, they all eat, breathe, sleep, shit, drive and work. There's no difference in them.
On topic: What happened between the 12 year old child is not something that I personally would like to hear. How a 12 year old child MET the man without her parents knowing, then having him sneak in and out of her house every day in "search for food" baffles me. Every mother that I know, even goes in to their child's room to either make their bed, put the laundry back into the child's drawyers or closet etc... How she would not notice a hole in the child's bed confuses me once again, and makes me wonder if she is a good mother.
It is also something to note, that I not once heard anything about the father. Where is he in this picture?
The man surely has a society problem. Why could he not be with women his own age? From his picture, he does not look like an obese, one eyed, stick legged, hook as an hand man. I can assure you that he had the possibility to receive a girl friend who would care and love him and vice versa. He had a necessity to be with a child of 12 years of age, and as Strafe and Testie can point out, age does not really mean a lot when you are in love. Who knows if he or was not in love. Or if she had loved him. I am not excusing this man's unallowable behavior, and the steps he went to be with the person he obviously cared about. Perhaps he was creating illegal underaged pornography video tapes. Only God can tell.
|
United Kingdom10598 Posts
|
On November 14 2006 16:26 Chibi[OWNS] wrote: again newb the general consuses is that men naturally find little girls attractive
no it's not rofl
|
|
|
|