Pedophilia

[Norsemaiden]

this^^^ is why moral relativism should be applied to sexual encounters instead of absolute law and why both genders reaching orgasm through heterosexual blowjobs and pussy eating should be taught in the school system's sex ed classes... if you're not psychologicaly/financially cappable of being an adequete parent, then you shouldn't be doing the act that produces children... but then not being ready to be a parent doesn't mean you should be denied the privilege of reaching orgasm

I am not sure but I think that they already do teach the above in sex education in Britain in a lot of schools - and golden showers too It is just what someone told me.
It may be only (unintentionally) encouraging them to have sex and end be no deterent to teenage pregnancy since the number of teen pregnancies haven't gone down.
Can anyone in an English school confirm this? I'll check for any references.

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

I am not sure but I think that they already do teach the above in sex education in Britain in a lot of schools - and golden showers too
It may be only encouraging them to have sex and end be no deterent to teenage pregnancy since the number of teen pregnancies haven't gone down.
Can anyone in an English school confirm this? I'll check for any references.

sorry i wasn't clear
i meant to say "American school systems"
i already knew that they teach golden showers and anal in other countries...
i was saying that they should teach those things in america that they already teach in other countries with no obviously visible bad effects

 

[Silver Incubus]

I agree with ^^^ pretty much, although I have yet to move out and so on and so forth. But everyone is subject to different things in life and I really feel that this affects how much a person has matured by a certain age, etc. It isn't really possible to say x person will mature by this age, mentally, emotionally and physically because this is the age at which everyone else has matured. That just doesn't make sense to me at all.

I also think that the age of legal consent here (16) is a good age because although I don't think it will stop very many people actually having sex before 16, it means that they are not under pressure to do it at 13 to be 'cool' because the law says that's when people should be 'doing it'. It also acts as a rough guide as to what sort of age you should be before you have sex, if you are a mature person at the age of 15 and in a steady relationship and feel that the time is right then okay, why not? 16 isn't so far off and if you're mature enough to talk about it with each other and to purchase contraception and so on then I don't see the problem. Having said that, it doesn't really mean that you're responsible enough to deal with the potential consequences because not all contraceptives are 100% effective.

Well there is the pill and Condoms, and they fail almost never when used together. (As much as I hate wearing comdoms)

 

[Shiny McShining Rodriguez]

in response to the 1st 2 paragraphs
what happens if psychological sexual maturity happens BEFORE physical sexual maturity (which is something that child psychologists have actually documented)
in response to the last paragraph i am also 22 and totally disagree with it except for the last part of the last sentance

Well indeed, what happens? If you're talking about lowering the age of consent to 14 for example, so that anyone can legally have sex with a 14 year old, then chances are that some of those 14 year olds will be psychologically ready for sex and some won't (regardless of what stage they are at physically). Surely it is better to deny sex from those who are than allow those who aren't to be harmed?

In regard to the last paragraph I wrote, I guess I based that too strongly on my own experience, perhaps you and many others were wise teenagers, and were more mature when you were 16 than at 18 or 22.

I was not trying to suggest that teenagers should be locked up and prevented from making their own decisions, on the contrary, they should be educated thoroughly as to the risks and allowed to make their own choices.

 

[derek]

I'm going to be honest, I wanted to consider myself an adult when I was 15-18, and I indeed did. It can also be patronising to not be considered one, but I seriously do not think anyone is a full adult till they have to live for themselves and take care of their own needs.

I think in our social context sex is made out to be a BIIIIIG deal, so kids need to be able to be mature enough to handle it.

 

[Neith]

this^^^ is why moral relativism should be applied to sexual encounters instead of absolute law and why both genders reaching orgasm through heterosexual blowjobs and pussy eating should be taught in the school system's sex ed classes... if you're not psychologicaly/financially cappable of being an adequete parent, then you shouldn't be doing the act that produces children... but then not being ready to be a parent doesn't mean you should be denied the privilege of reaching orgasm

I see what you're saying, but I really don't know how well this would go down here. In my school we don't get taught any of this stuff, and I'm pretty certain my mum would flip if I was to go home I tell her "today we were taught how to give blowjobs. Can't wait to try out the tips on my boyfriend." Obviously, I wouldn't say this, and the example is exaggerated to illustrate the point. I just don't think it's the greatest thing to get taught in school and I personally would find it humiliating to have a 60+ teacher talking about it to us. But that's just me.

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

I see what you're saying, but I really don't know how well this would go down here. In my school we don't get taught any of this stuff, and I'm pretty certain my mum would flip if I was to go home I tell her "today we were taught how to give blowjobs. Can't wait to try out the tips on my boyfriend." Obviously, I wouldn't say this, and the example is exaggerated to illustrate the point. I just don't think it's the greatest thing to get taught in school and I personally would find it humiliating to have a 60+ teacher talking about it to us. But that's just me.

i was describing the way things actually already are in certain countries, i just can't remember which ones, and suggesting that the teaching of how to orgasm without doing the act that produces children is something that should be practiced in America, but then i realized that it prolly wouldn't work here though

 

[Intoxicator]

I don't really think teaching teenagers oral sex is going to stop them from having full-on intercourse. Most know about it anyway (I haven't met anyone that doesn't). A lot of teenagers do stick to oral sex, for a while at least, and some choose to go beyond that.

 

[infoterror]

Are perverts interested in reaching out to your kids through
pornographic images on wikipedia?

Wikipedia is pedophile heaven!

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

I don't really think teaching teenagers oral sex is going to stop them from having full-on intercourse

it will if the people teaching it actually know what the fucking hell they're talking about. There's a hell of a lot more to giving a blow-job than just opening your mouth and getting "skull-fucked", if a blow-job is done properly, it's gonna feel a thousand times better than fucking a pussy ever will, i garantee it. According to that Canadian sex-question call-in show that is brodcasted in America, a whole 9 out of 10 females can't reach orgasm without direct clitoral stimulation, but vaginas are like snowflakes: there aren't any 2 pussies shaped exactly the same, and not many males know this but for a lot of women direct clitoral stimulation just isn't physically possible durring penis-in-vagina sex. And that 9 out of 10 number is seriously fucked-up because it's based on the assumption that the G-Spot is a myth. It's been proven that the G-Spot is biologically analogous to a male's prostate and the reason that most women don't know they have a G-spot is because for most women, most penises can't physically reach the G-Spot. That's part of the reason so many american married women cheat on their husbands with other women, a lesbian knows how to bend and curl her fingers to massage that magic spot that a straght cylinder dick can never reach. It's also why you've got so many american women obssessed with those dicks with that scary-sharp bend in the middle where it looks like it's broken.

 

[derek]

Lets try and keep the graphic sexual chat to a minimum. Try and keep on topic.

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

Lets try and keep the graphic sexual chat to a minimum. Try and keep on topic.

yeah i guess that was a little too graphic for a breeder audience, but if breeders weren't so intensely obsessed with penis-in-vagina sex, then everything i said would be "common knolege"

 

[derek]

yeah i guess that was a little too graphic for a breeder audience, but if breeders weren't so intensely obsessed with penis-in-vagina sex, then everything i said would be "common knolege"

Perhaps. Your point was that actively ecouraging and teaching kids oral sex would help curb the steady rise of teenage pregnancy though. That required no graphic discussion.

In response: Thats madness. Teach kids responsible and open sexual education, that will curb teenage pregnancy. The "forbidden" factor will be removed and the vast majority of well brought up kids will make the right choice. Substituting vaginal intercourse for oral sex hardly solves the problem.

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

Perhaps. Your point was that actively ecouraging and teaching kids oral sex would help curb the steady rise of teenage pregnancy though. That required no graphic discussion.

In response: Thats madness. Teach kids responsible and open sexual education, that will curb teenage pregnancy. The "forbidden" factor will be removed and the vast majority of well brought up kids will make the right choice. Substituting vaginal intercourse for oral sex hardly solves the problem.

you're probbably right, but part of the excessive teen-age pregnancy prob (in america) is that girls as young as 12 or 13 going crazy and getting pregnant because they're actually WANTING and trying to become pregnant

 

[derek]

What makes you think that?

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

What makes you think that?

i've seen it... alot, i'm just spazzy and i didn't think to mention it till just now

 

[derek]

I remember reading a while back that pregnancy was often the only option for poor families with many kids, and parents advocated it because the child could then apply for their own housing and benefits.

 

[LORD_RED_DRAGON]

I remember reading a while back that pregnancy was often the only option for poor families with many kids, and parents advocated it because the child could then apply for their own housing and benefits.

yeah housing and foodstamps and child support from broke girls fucking really rich guys i've seen this too, but what i was talking about was that i've seen girls like the ones on Maury Povich show saying "i'm gonna have a baby and my parents aren't gonna stop me!!!"

 

[Norsemaiden]

This is an important addition to this debate. No one has yet discussed about the various paedophile scandals that have implicated establishment involvement and cover ups. Anyone British will probably have heard of this in relation to 1. Fred and Rosemary West, the British serial killers who also pimped out their daughters, often allegedly to establishment figures and police officers.
2.Marc Dutroux, the Beast of Belgium. There was a huge public march, protesting about the State's handling of the case of this paedophile serial killer. Officials seemed to have routinely ignored tips that later proved accurate, including Dutroux's own mother saying he was holding girls captive at one of his houses. One of the men arrested with Dutroux claimed some of the girls were "kidnapped to order" for someone else.
Dutroux was a key player in a child prostitution and pornography ring.
One of Dutroux's accomplices was a businessman who admitted organising an orgy at a Belgian chateau attended by governement officials, a former European commisioner and police.
"A Belgian senator noted, quite accurately, that such parties were a part of a system 'which operates to this day and is used to blackmail the highly placed people who take part'".
http://www.the7thfire.com/politics and%History/Pedophocracy/child_sexual_abuse_in_Brussels.htm

3. Thomas Hamilton. The Dunblane Primary school massacre. Hamilton walked into the Scottish school and shot dead 14 children and a few teachers. He was a paedophile who ran a boys club. There's a lot of suspicious goings on in this case and the (Cullen) inquiry into it has classified some information as having to be kept secret for 100 years. The highest government involvement is strongly implicated in this case, a clandestine peadophile ring reportedly set up by Hamilton for the British elite.

4. The Welsh children care homes scandal. Frank Beck (who worked at a home or was in charge in some way) took the rap for the child abuse going on
but he claimed that he procured children for others. As a result of claims by one young man that when he was in care, Beck took him to the home of Greville Janner, where he was sexually abused, Janner was investigated by police. Lord Janner is/was chairman (of something I won't mention), a Labour MP, and a QC (magistrate). He was not convicted. http://www.bvalphaserver.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=4723

There are RUMOURS circling on the net that the Blair's administration is a total licentious club of flamboyant homosexual cruisers and out of control paedophiles, and that the newspapers have gagging orders on them because if the truth came out it would bring the government down (understatement!).
There is SUSPICION that America uses the threat of exposing the truth of what is going on to keep Blair obedient to Bush's war on terror.
I don't know what to believe myself, but it is worth thinking about. Google a certain politician's name followed by "paedophile" and see. (This is speculation only and there is no attempt to insinuate that it is anything more than that, we all know you can't believe everything on the net, but we can be open minded.)

 

[petehis kahn]

I'm just describing what everyone I've ever met went through. What, you thought I just made that stuff up on the spot? I don't really think it traumatized anybody so much as it taught them. I grew up in America, where the hell did you grow up? little kids always get curious about what the other gender's genitals look like long before the sex drive kicks in, you know like when little kids try to walk in on somebody of the opposite gender in the shower. In the 1600s every woman got married at 14.

I pray to every god that has been thought of existing in the history of mankind that this so called "point" has been addressed, but I am doubtful.

As a student of history I can print out this quote here and have a good chuckle at your opinion.

Was it 14 year old girls marrying 14 year old boys in the 1600s, or instead 14 year old girls marrying 30 year old + men for the power and wealth the marriage would bring. I hardly would say it was a consenting marriage as well.

Love in marriage is a very modern concept.

If 14 year olds want to have sex with another 14 year old than besides the obvious risk of STD's and pregnancy it is to me morally a fine thing, that’s not the point of this thread

It is more of a question of someone aged 20+ sleeping with a 14 year old and that is in my opinion morally incorrect.

I am 23 and I find the idea of sleeping with a 14 year old or even a 16 year old so devoid of decency that I could never do it, stick to people your own age is my thoughts.

Also the guy throwing the term Moral relativism around, take this on board.

From a moral relativism position MOST of the west in its values believes that sleeping with a child, say for example anyone under the age of 16 is morally wrong. I of course mean adults, which is obviously why every western nation I can think of basically has an age of consent.

So from that position it is wrong for an adult to be sexual with a child and more so it is equally as right for society to charge them with the same crime that they would charge someone who had raped a child with.

I am not talking divine command theory or Utilitarianism here, I am speaking from a relativism point of view the sceptical belief that there are no governing morals and that ethics is something that is down to culture (which is a strange point to be raising) your opinions on it being acceptable for an adult to help a child reach orgasm or however you creepily phrased it are no more valid than my opinion that people who sexually interfere with children should be executed.

Culturally in the west my friend the facts are it is morally wrong to sexually interfere with children, you are the one advocating from a culture to culture bases, I guess if people want to molest children they should leap into a time machine and transport themselves to an era when it was socially acceptable.

P.S http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativist_fallacy

On the other hand, if someone adopts a simple relativist stance as an ad hoc defense of a controversial or otherwise compromised position—saying, in effect, that "what is true for you is not necessarily true for me," and thereby attempting to avoid having to mount any further defense of the position—one might be said to have committed a fallacy.