Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 132

Thread: Sexual abuse allegations- how best to protect when the truth is unknown

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    That's fine...




    It is? I personally felt that the main thrust of Harmful to Minors was decidedly elsewhere. Quoting from the wiki entry on her book:
    Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children From Sex... is a controversial book by Judith Levine that was published in 2002. The foreword was written by former United States Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders, who resigned after suggesting that masturbation be promoted as a means of preventing young people from engaging in riskier forms of sexual activity.[1]

    The "Author's Note" states: "Most of the research for this book, including interviews, was conducted between 1996 and early 2000, and pertinent statistics were updated in 2001. The names of all nonprofessionals have been fictionalized, along with some identifying characteristics."

    In the book, Levine lambastes US laws concerning child pornography, statutory rape, and abortion for minors using a variety of studies and interviews with teenagers and adults alike (see Acknowledgments). Levine also analyzes abstinence-only sex education, which Levine considers counter-productive and dangerous.

    The book also examines the terms "harmful to minors" and "indecency," which Levine considers to be umbrella terms for censorship, as well as the Dylan V. Heather case, and the little-known SPARK Support Program for Abusive Reactive Kids and STEP Sexual Treatment Education Program and Services, both of which she claims do far more harm than the child sex offenders did themselves.

    Because of its controversial nature and content, it was nearly impossible for Levine to find a publisher—one prospective publisher even called it "radioactive." University of Minnesota Press eventually agreed to publish the book, despite cries of outrage from the right wing of Minnesota's political establishment.

    It became famous after it won the 2002 Los Angeles Times Book Award for Current Interest. Conservatives such as Joe Scarborough and Robert Knight accused Levine of promoting pedophilia for her suggestion that the US adopt statutory rape laws similar to those in the Netherlands. Some demanded the book be removed from libraries.





    Can you give an example in her writings that you feel demonstrates this belief of yours?
    Read the last chapter of her book. It's an us or them attitude.

    The main thrust of her book is to remove the Statute of Limitations for rape and molestation claims. I am against this, because of the psuedo-scientific criteria for guilt. Of the three people I know personally in my life (I'm in my 30's) that had to deal with this shit, they were are screwed by a system that did not need objective evidence or didn't require a minimum of witness that were found to be credible.

    This doesn't mean I want the guilty to go free, but it's not the law's responsibility to protect them if they can't provide evidence that satisfies a scientific criteria for guilt. By not being scientific by their criteria, they are knowingly victimizing innocent people. This victimization destroys their lives, it follows them forever. They always are viewed as a sicko. In the case of the most serious crimes, you must have the highest standards for the criteria of guilt. At present, the system is very imbalanced and draconian.

    Most of these cases are not psychopaths abducting and creating a gimp in their basement, then murdering them. This is very rare, but was hyped up since the 70's (Stranger Danger). The majority of the Kids on the Milk Carton are parental abductions. What the statistics I have come across say is that it's mostly family and friends. Family and friends may do some things that may seem inappropriate to our culture sexually, but they are not physically harming them. It's a bunch of diddling and tushy-touching. In terms of the claims of psychological and emotional abuse, what I heard and read is that the family and friend who engage in these activities don't threaten them into doing the act. They are curious or already know and want to do it. The threat occurs after the act. This threat is due to the threat of being found out, not to gain access to the act. The taboo and the condemnation I believe are the primary source of psychological and emotional abuse, not the act itself. I met a spectrum of people over the years as adults who described what happened to them. Some felt it was a problem, others not. Those who did find it to be a problem mainly described feels that logically would spawn from public condemnation and popular taboo, not their sexual feeling themselves they felt during the act. In light of this, I think we are actually be too harsh on people who are proven to have been involved in such behavior. They usually are treated like murderers when it comes to punishment.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    If he hadn't actually broken the law, I don't think that his jailing was guaranteed by any means.
    Have you ever meant someone found guilty of something they didn't do by our system? I think your answer is no. If it were yes, it would be irrational for you to say his jailing was not guaranteed by any means. There definitely is a means they use. It's called a simple accusation, and nothing else is necessary.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by swarm View Post

    That means it doesn't matter *why* he had sex with her or if she gave permission or begged him or threatened him or the pope ordained him as a priest. The act in and of itself is illegal no matter the circumstances.
    Argument from Authority. Fallacy. Without objective proof the act itself causes on of the parties harm, the law is bogus.

    Quote Originally Posted by swarm View Post
    I can't believe you bought that story either. He has to register because he is a pedophile.

    If you are going to be a pedophile in the US, and most countries, you have to marry her first.
    She was know around the neighborhood for doing stuff. It was just another one of her hedonistic acts that she would have done with one of the 13 boys or anyone else she targeted old or not. I view it as just as harmless because it really meant nothing to her or the people she did it with except at the time. Is that what we teach anyway and act anyway. Run around. Everyone I know has had several different partners.

    In terms of this guy, I think he got a bad rap. He not's the type to force people to do things. But, he was the kind of guy you could talk into things. He didn't hurt her. I don't give a fuck what he did. But I don't appreciate the fact we got idiots putting guys like him away for 7 years for this bullshit. And making everyone for the rest of his life think he's a fucking sicko stalking down children and raping them. I got a real problem with these idiots.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Bells View Post
    And it's not so much as being picky or being less picky as actually finding an 11 year old girl arousing..
    I assume you think there is a problem with someone that is aroused by an 11 year old girl. Consider the following.

    A lovemap is a term used to describe a psycholgocial and chemical state that occurs when we see or imagine what is sexually arousing to us. Lovemaps can occur due to innate preference, but are mostly influenced by the simultaneous moments of feelings of arousal/orgasm and specific environmental variables.

    So, taking lovemap into consideration, consider a 13 year boy who has a lovemap that turns him on because he sees an 11 year girl. This is considered normal. Once lovemaps are created, they stay with us our whole life, just like all good memories do. So, when he turns 18, now his lovemap makes him have a criminal mind, a mental disorder, and a sicko by societies standards. Hmmm. I smell psuedo-science.

    There is absolutely no proof that lovemaps should biologically age. This is utter nonsense. Lovemaps instead become varied with experience.

    If a 13 year old uses the wild and crazy technology we have today to capture his most intimate experiences alone and with his girlfriends, when he turns 18, now he is a sicko that can be put away for a very, very long time for mere possession of his own memories. He will be branded a sicko for the rest of his life, due to his own documentation of his life. Hmmm. I smell idiocy.
    Last edited by ancientregime; 02-22-09 at 03:33 PM.

  5. #25
    Monkey see, monkey denigrate visceral_instinct's Avatar
    Posts
    7,918
    Quote Originally Posted by Bells View Post
    He could simply have called her mother straight away and told her what her daughter was doing and that he would no longer be able to babysit ever again and that she was to arrange someone to come and take over the babysitting duties immediately.
    I agree, he should have told the girl's mother, and refused to have contact with the child again.

    If a 13 year old uses the wild and crazy technology we have today to capture his most intimate experiences alone and with his girlfriends, when he turns 18, now he is a sicko that can be put away for a very, very long time for mere possession of his own memories. He will be branded a sicko for the rest of his life, due to his own documentation of his life. Hmmm. I smell idiocy.
    Bullshit. Having positive memories is not the same as owning child porn.

    So called lovemaps DO age. At 13, girls will probably find 14-15 year old boys attractive; at 45, they'll want someone just a slight bit older.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by visceral_instinct View Post
    Bullshit. Having positive memories is not the same as owning child porn.
    What do you mean by positive memories? If you mean that good sexual memories while you were 13 recorded onto your digital camera, yes, that qualifies as child porn according to the present US psuedo-scientific laws. Teens are getting busted left and right for sending pictures of their genitals to each other via cell phones. They are getting drug into court and threatened with pedophile charges.[1]

    Quote Originally Posted by visceral_instinct View Post
    So called lovemaps DO age. At 13, girls will probably find 14-15 year old boys attractive; at 45, they'll want someone just a slight bit older.
    Wrong. You have no proof their lovemap dissapears. As long as they can remember this person, the lovemap is there.

    Lovemaps do become varied with experience, they don't suffer spontaneously combustion. If you feel they do, at the very least describe the process in which they are altered.

    Any person with a stable memory will have a love maps of the first people that significantly turned them on. They will be turned on throughout their whole life by these memories or turned on by people who share similar traits. A stable memory means that it represent what you sensed and felt a particular time. There is no reason why that memory should alter itself unless the brain is damaged or tampered with.

    This is also demonstrated in the so-called paraphilias. Once a person is turned on by feet, they are always a foot lover. Personalities, physical traits, and objects are not boundaries in which lovemaps can establish themselves.

    Now, if you get brain damage or are brainwashed, lovemaps can be destroyed, altered or tampered with. But, normal healthy minds never forget their true lovemaps.

  7. #27
    Monkey see, monkey denigrate visceral_instinct's Avatar
    Posts
    7,918
    What do you mean by positive memories? If you mean that good sexual memories while you were 13 recorded onto your digital camera, yes, that qualifies as child porn according to the present US psuedo-scientific laws. Teens are getting busted left and right for sending pictures of their genitals to each other via cell phones. They are getting drug into court and threatened with pedophile charges.[1]
    There's a difference between keeping something in your mind where it is private and keeping it as a picture and sending it to other people.

    Any person with a stable memory will have a love maps of the first people that significantly turned them on. They will be turned on throughout their whole life by these memories or turned on by people who share similar traits. A stable memory means that it represent what you sensed and felt a particular time. There is no reason why that memory should alter itself unless the brain is damaged or tampered with.
    That a fact?

    I know I no longer feel turned on by memories of the first guy I was with. Nostalgia, sure, but those memories don't get me wet.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x
    If he hadn't actually broken the law, I don't think that his jailing was guaranteed by any means.
    Have you ever met someone found guilty of something they didn't do by our system?
    No, but I've read about it, in an excellent book called "The Case for the Defense" by Canadian Lawyer Eddie Greenspan.


    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    I think your answer is no. If it were yes, it would be irrational for you to say his jailing was not guaranteed by any means. There definitely is a means they use. It's called a simple accusation, and nothing else is necessary.
    While I agree that at present, I think that the law is too light on proof when it comes to accusations of this type, people -can- get off even with this type of accusation. What's more, even if he didn't get off right away, he could still appeal the decision. I suggest you take a look at "The Case for the Defense".

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime View Post
    I assume you think there is a problem with someone that is aroused by an 11 year old girl. Consider the following.
    An 11 year old, 12 -14 or so year old? No problem there at all. An adult male getting aroused by an 11 year old girl? Yeah, there is a problem there.

    A lovemap is a term used to describe a psycholgocial and chemical state that occurs when we see or imagine what is sexually arousing to us. Lovemaps can occur due to innate preference, but are mostly influenced by the simultaneous moments of feelings of arousal/orgasm and specific environmental variables.

    So, taking lovemap into consideration, consider a 13 year boy who has a lovemap that turns him on because he sees an 11 year girl. This is considered normal. Once lovemaps are created, they stay with us our whole life, just like all good memories do. So, when he turns 18, now his lovemap makes him have a criminal mind, a mental disorder, and a sicko by societies standards. Hmmm. I smell psuedo-science.
    I'll give you an example. Lets say I had an intense relationship when I was 13, with a 13 year old boy. You are saying that when I am in my 30's, I could be "turned on" and act on said arousal by a 13 year old boy because of that first relationship many years before. So if I had sex with a 13 year old boy while in my 30's, it would be perfectly normal and acceptable in your opinion, because of that "lovemap"?

    There is absolutely no proof that lovemaps should biologically age. This is utter nonsense. Lovemaps instead become varied with experience.
    There is proof that it does seeing that adults aren't rushing to have sex with young children or teenagers because of the directions from their "love maps".

    If a 13 year old uses the wild and crazy technology we have today to capture his most intimate experiences alone and with his girlfriends, when he turns 18, now he is a sicko that can be put away for a very, very long time for mere possession of his own memories. He will be branded a sicko for the rest of his life, due to his own documentation of his life. Hmmm. I smell idiocy.
    So you are excusing your adult male friend sleeping with an 11 year old girl because of his first experience when he was 13? I must admit, I've heard some excuses in my time to attempt to explain or defend having sex with children, but that is a new one.

    Your friend will be branded a "sicko" for the rest of his life because he bonked an 11 year old girl. You know.. a child.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime View Post
    Read the last chapter of her book. It's an us or them attitude.
    Chapter 11? Or the Epilogue?


    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    The main thrust of her book is to remove the Statute of Limitations for rape and molestation claims.
    I disagree.


    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    I am against this, because of the psuedo-scientific criteria for guilt. Of the three people I know personally in my life (I'm in my 30's) that had to deal with this shit, they were are screwed by a system that did not need objective evidence or didn't require a minimum of witness that were found to be credible.
    I'm not saying that injustices aren't done. But I'd definitely like to here more about these 3 cases before commenting further on them.


    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    This doesn't mean I want the guilty to go free, but it's not the law's responsibility to protect them if they can't provide evidence that satisfies a scientific criteria for guilt.
    How convenient. Then who's responsibility is it, pray tell? This is why I insist that if it's a bit of a toss up as to whether the party is guilt or not, then I think that a compromise solution might be best.


    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    By not being scientific by their criteria, they are knowingly victimizing innocent people. This victimization destroys their lives, it follows them forever.
    The problem here ancient, is that lives can be destroyed on either side of this equation- both for people wrongly accused of molestation as well as people who aren't believed when they say they were molested, and yet they were. This is why I see the need for compromise when it's unsure as to who's telling the truth.


    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    Family and friends may do some things that may seem inappropriate to our culture sexually, but they are not physically harming them.
    By all means, attempt to prove this is so for all cases.


    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    In terms of the claims of psychological and emotional abuse, what I heard and read is that the family and friend who engage in these activities don't threaten them into doing the act.
    What you've.. heard. ancient, we can't rely on anecdotal evidence here. I've heard both sides; from stories such as Mary Kay Letourneau and her young lover, now husband, Vili Fualaau, to decidedly darker fair, such as the Catholic sex abuse cases.


    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    They are curious or already know and want to do it. The threat occurs after the act. This threat is due to the threat of being found out, not to gain access to the act.
    Look, perhaps that's how it's been told to you. Perhaps it was true in the cases you've heard. One thing's for sure, though, it doesn't apply to all cases. And whether the threat is made before or after, it's still wrong either way.


    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    The taboo and the condemnation I believe are the primary source of psychological and emotional abuse, not the act itself.
    Let's assume for a second that the taboo and condemnation are the primary source of psychological and emotional abuse; if this is the case, I thinkthe solution would be to change the laws. Breaking the laws, however, is generally bound to get you into the types of predicaments that your jailed friend is in.


    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    I met a spectrum of people over the years as adults who described what happened to them. Some felt it was a problem, others not. Those who did find it to be a problem mainly described feels that logically would spawn from public condemnation and popular taboo, not their sexual feeling themselves they felt during the act. In light of this, I think we are actually be too harsh on people who are proven to have been involved in such behavior. They usually are treated like murderers when it comes to punishment.
    I know that Judith Levine is rather light as to the adult/minor thing in her book. -However-, you should know that she had a sexual relationship with an adult when she was an adolescent and found it to be a positive experience. I think you'd also like some of the points made in the book "Pedophilia: Biosocial Dimensions". Neither book advocates breaking the law but both believe that society is, as you say, frequently going about protecting minors in the wrong way and not educating society as a whole enough concerning the pitfalls as well as how positive things such as love and its expressions can be distorted at times due to societal beliefs.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by visceral_instinct View Post
    There's a difference between keeping something in your mind where it is private and keeping it as a picture and sending it to other people.
    There is no fundamental difference. A memory is a memory, no matter where it is stored, in the mind or in a text document or on a memory chip. It represents the same account. So what if technology helps us with details that are otherwise difficult to visualize? Accuracy is really all they are making criminal, it has nothing to do with memory itself, otherwise our memories would put us in jail, because we have illegal images of our past written on our mental hard drive. Remember masturbating when you were under age? Ooops, illegal image! Better not tell anyone about that or even joke, that's kiddy porn content.



    Quote Originally Posted by visceral_instinct View Post
    I know I no longer feel turned on by memories of the first guy I was with. Nostalgia, sure, but those memories don't get me wet.
    Maybe the relationship wasn't really that special to you. Maybe it was, but you refuse to summon your lovemap of those special times. Maybe you have a memory problem. Maybe this person did something to you that created terrible memories that have mired the initial feelings. Perhaps you have brain damage. Lots of things can cause you to forget or cause it to be altered or difficult to recall. When it comes to our lovemaps, we don't forget. That's the general rule.

    I personally remember every one I had sex with. I can picture it like it was really occurring. Some of these people I would never ever, ever be in a relationship again, but I can recall some very, very hot moments that indeed are turn ons. I made a pact with myself very early in life, do not bullshit myself. I think that has had an effect on my sacred view of memory.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    No, but I've read about it, in an excellent book called "The Case for the Defense" by Canadian Lawyer Eddie Greenspan.




    While I agree that at present, I think that the law is too light on proof when it comes to accusations of this type, people -can- get off even with this type of accusation. What's more, even if he didn't get off right away, he could still appeal the decision. I suggest you take a look at "The Case for the Defense".
    It's too light on proof since it's criteria for proof only requires accusation.

    I'm not concerned with people getting off that are guilty, because that is not the law's responsibility. The law is to handle things in a reasonable and objective way, otherwise they are guaranteed to create victims. Again, once you practice faith based reasoning you create victims.

    For someone to blame the law for not punishing someone who is guilty because of lack of evidence is outrageous. These people demand irrational views of guilt and thereby knowingly punish innocent people. When you knowingly punish innocent people, you are a criminal. The law is set up to stop crime by punishing those who can be proven guilty, not punish those who are called guilty.

    I'll take a look at the book, nonetheless.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Bells View Post
    An 11 year old, 12 -14 or so year old? No problem there at all. An adult male getting aroused by an 11 year old girl? Yeah, there is a problem there.
    You said there was a problem. Can you empirically explain the problem only in terms of arousal.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bells View Post
    I'll give you an example. Lets say I had an intense relationship when I was 13, with a 13 year old boy. You are saying that when I am in my 30's, I could be "turned on" and act on said arousal by a 13 year old boy because of that first relationship many years before.
    Now you are back to doing what you did in the other thread. You are distorting what I said. I'll be patient with you, but your credibility takes a hit when you do that. Either your memory is poor, your reasoning is bad, or your just trolling me here. I never said act on anything. I was only talking about lovemaps and being aroused by them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bells View Post
    So if I had sex with a 13 year old boy while in my 30's, it would be perfectly normal and acceptable in your opinion, because of that "lovemap"?
    To answer you question, no. My opinion is that I think you think people should be imprisoned and harassed for the rest of your life as a sicko for such an act. I wouldn't wish for you to do something so stupid to yourself.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bells View Post
    There is proof that it does [lovemaps dissapear or change] seeing that adults aren't rushing to have sex with young children or teenagers because of the directions from their "love maps".
    Lovemaps can exist without rushing to have sex with people under 18. Just like people can get aroused by people all around them due to lovemaps and not act. If this were true, all the Playboy centerfolds would have mile long lines of men camping out, getting ready for their turn because they have a love map that they have to rush out and satisfy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bells View Post
    So you are excusing your adult male friend sleeping with an 11 year old girl because of his first experience when he was 13? I must admit, I've heard some excuses in my time to attempt to explain or defend having sex with children, but that is a new one.
    There you go again distorting my statements. I never said I excused him because of his lovemaps. I don't know what his lovemaps are anyway. The reason I don't care that he did it was because she was hot to trot, she wanted it, he wanted, she did this, he did that, they did it, that's it. No one was hurt from that little scenario she trapped him in. But someone did get hurt once a spectacle was made out of it by people that had an agenda. They were not concerned with the truth or whether anyone was hurt. They just wanted to hurt people lives. They hurt my friends. And I'm here to broadcast what kind of idiots they are. If it weren't my friend I'd give you the case number.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bells View Post
    Your friend will be branded a "sicko" for the rest of his life because he bonked an 11 year old girl. You know.. a child.
    No because he bonked a hot to trot bitch who spread 'em wide and said if you don't lick I'll say you did it anyway. And he got in trouble not because he actually did it, they didn't care about proving things. They only care that she said he raped her. He actually didn't even do what she said he did. She changed the whole story.

  14. #34
    ancientregime:

    Have you decided not to debate me in the Formal Debates forum, then?

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    Chapter 11? Or the Epilogue?
    I think it's the epilogue. I don't have the book in front of me.


    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    I'm not saying that injustices aren't done. But I'd definitely like to here more about these 3 cases before commenting further on them.
    They are actually pretty mild compared to the other one and they don't really need to be explained. Just put it this way: I know they are innocent, but they were found guilty. It's really depressing to know that I'm in country with idiots who are respected, but destroy peoples lives.


    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    How convenient. Then who's responsibility is it, pray tell? This is why I insist that if it's a bit of a toss up as to whether the party is guilt or not, then I think that a compromise solution might be best.
    The responsibility is on the person making charges to provide evidence that will prove the other person guilty.

    The law is a domain of reason, not faith. Reason doesn't make guilt convenient, faith does.

    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    The problem here ancient, is that lives can be destroyed on either side of this equation- both for people wrongly accused of molestation as well as people who aren't believed when they say they were molested, and yet they were. This is why I see the need for compromise when it's unsure as to who's telling the truth.
    There can be no compromise with reason. Reason is not that way. If there is something to have faith in, it is what is known, not what we guess at. The law cannot be made responsible for evidence that does not prove guilt.


    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    Family and friends may do some things that may seem inappropriate to our culture sexually, but they are not physically harming them.
    By all means, attempt to prove this is so for all cases.
    I infer this from the fact that most of the people involved are family and friends. Family and friends don't fit the profile of people that hurt one another. In the worst cases, there will be evidence of harm. No doubt. But fiddling, fondling and tooshy touching is not going to cause harm, but the taboo of it will cause psychological and emotional damage.

    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    What you've.. heard. ancient, we can't rely on anecdotal evidence here. I've heard both sides; from stories such as Mary Kay Letourneau and her young lover, now husband, Vili Fualaau, to decidedly darker fair, such as the Catholic sex abuse cases.
    Just think about it. Family and friends consist of the people who do this. The profile? They don't really have one. It's could be anyone. And the statistics say one of four of your closest male family members gets turned on by preteens.The scientific tests have proved that over 25% of men get sexually aroused when viewing underage pictures. This hardly classifies as deviant social orientation. Maybe deviant in terms of folk classification, but not in terms of the truth.


    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    Look, perhaps that's how it's been told to you. Perhaps it was true in the cases you've heard. One thing's for sure, though, it doesn't apply to all cases. And whether the threat is made before or after, it's still wrong either way.
    Remember, family and friends don't fit the profile of people who hurt each other, because they don't do that. They are practicing unpopular hedonism with each other.

    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    Let's assume for a second that the taboo and condemnation are the primary source of psychological and emotional abuse; if this is the case, I think the solution would be to change the laws.
    One way to begin is to put laws to the pseudo-scientific test. Science is scary isn't it? Some people would not rather live by the truth; they prefer their folk beliefs, like the world is flat.


    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    I know that Judith Levine is rather light as to the adult/minor thing in her book. -However-, you should know that she had a sexual relationship with an adult when she was an adolescent and found it to be a positive experience. I think you'd also like some of the points made in the book
    Well perhaps, I should pick it up again. I admit, I didn't read the whole thing. I read the jacket. I read the table of contents, first chapter, and a few select paragraphs, and the last chapter. I was really irritated with that. I do not like people who hurt children, but children are not the only ones that can be hurt. I especially don't like it when people use children to hurt others in a way that somehow benefits their occupation. What the statute of limitations can do under the present criteria for guilt only means more people like a few friends will be very, very fucked over. If they changed their criteria for guilt, I would be more than likely be open to it. It's bad enough we have faith based reason operating in our courts. We don't need to open the gate to send more cattle for slaughter.

    Quote Originally Posted by scott3x View Post
    "Pedophilia: Biosocial Dimensions". Neither book advocates breaking the law but both believe that society is, as you say, frequently going about protecting minors in the wrong way and not educating society as a whole enough concerning the pitfalls as well as how positive things such as love and its expressions can be distorted at times due to societal beliefs.
    Interesting link.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime View Post
    You said there was a problem. Can you empirically explain the problem only in terms of arousal.
    Read what I said again. I said that an adult becoming aroused at a 11 year old is a problem for the adult. A child around the same age as the 11 year old girl would not be so much as a problem. An adult getting a hard on for a child, yes, that is a problem and could result in catastrophic events, which your friend found out for himself.

    Now you are back to doing what you did in the other thread. You are distorting what I said. I'll be patient with you, but your credibility takes a hit when you do that. Either your memory is poor, your reasoning is bad, or your just trolling me here. I never said act on anything. I was only talking about lovemaps and being aroused by them.
    So you think it is perfectly normal for an adult to look at an 11 year old and becoming aroused because of the 11 year old?

    To answer you question, no. My opinion is that I think you think people should be imprisoned and harassed for the rest of your life as a sicko for such an act. I wouldn't wish for you to do something so stupid to yourself.
    I don't think you quite understand the severity of what your adult friend did. He had sex with an 11 year old girl. She wasn't even a teenager yet. She was 11. Still in primary school.

    I don't wish for adults who have sex with 11 year old's to be imprisoned and then be harassed for the rest of their lives and be seen to be a sicko. I wish for adults who see fit to have sex with 11 year old's to be imprisoned for the rest of their lives.

    Imagine if you had an 11 year old girl and you find out that an adult male had sex with her. You'd welcome him into the family or call the police?

    Lovemaps can exist without rushing to have sex with people under 18. Just like people can get aroused by people all around them due to lovemaps and not act. If this were true, all the Playboy centerfolds would have mile long lines of men camping out, getting ready for their turn because they have a love map that they have to rush out and satisfy.
    But your friend did do it, didn't he? What exactly does that make him?

    Playboy magazines have adults posing in them. Not 11 year old girls. Big difference. And men are free to have sex with adult women. Children are another thing altogether.

    There you go again distorting my statements. I never said I excused him because of his lovemaps. I don't know what his lovemaps are anyway. The reason I don't care that he did it was because she was hot to trot, she wanted it, he wanted, she did this, he did that, they did it, that's it. No one was hurt from that little scenario she trapped him in. But someone did get hurt once a spectacle was made out of it by people that had an agenda. They were not concerned with the truth or whether anyone was hurt. They just wanted to hurt people lives. They hurt my friends. And I'm here to broadcast what kind of idiots they are. If it weren't my friend I'd give you the case number.
    How exactly did she trap him into it if he wanted it?

    Don't you get it? She was a child. An 11 year old girl, no matter how promiscuous, is still a child. As an adult, he should have had better restraint and advised her mother of the girl's actions and then stayed the hell away from her. Instead, he had sex with an 11 year old girl, a child and a minor. What he did was commit statutory rape. Why rape? Because as a child and as an 11 year old, she was too young to consent.

    There is no agenda. Unless you view the desire to protect children as being an agenda? Do you think children should be protected from adults who wish to have sex with them for whatever reason, lovemaps or no lovemaps? What agenda do you think was served in jailing your friend?

    You aren't broadcasting what kind of idiots they are. What you are broadcasting is that your friend is a pervert who wanted to have sex with an 11 year old girl after she asked him to. They are not the idiots. Your friend on the other hand, is.

    You see, I have worked in the legal system, making it my job to imprison people like your friend. And by god, I am glad to see that he didn't get away with it. Why? Because your friend is not only an idiot, but also one who cries foul after having sex with a child by trying to lay the blame on her when he was the one unable to control his own urges. As you said, he wanted it and he did it.

    No because he bonked a hot to trot bitch who spread 'em wide and said if you don't lick I'll say you did it anyway. And he got in trouble not because he actually did it, they didn't care about proving things. They only care that she said he raped her. He actually didn't even do what she said he did. She changed the whole story.
    So a child, who probably did not understand her actions, is a "hot to trot little bitch"? And what of your friend who did "lick" it? Your friend, I am sad to inform you, had sex with a child. Whether she invited him or not does not take away from the very simple fact that he got a hard on for an 11 year old girl and then had sex with her. He did get into trouble because he did do it. And yes, he did rape her because having sex with children is considered rape due to the fact that children are unable to consent.

    Your friend had several options open to him, all of which he obviously failed to act upon. Instead, he had sex with her because as you said, he obviously wanted to as well. So yes, your friend is a rapist and a paedophile.

    If I were you, if you ever have little girls, I'd get them the hell away from him.

  17. #37
    Registered Senior Member swarm's Avatar
    Posts
    4,207
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime View Post
    You are missing the point.
    No, you are missing the point. He did the crime and the courts found him guilty.

  18. #38
    Monkey see, monkey denigrate visceral_instinct's Avatar
    Posts
    7,918
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime View Post
    There is no fundamental difference. A memory is a memory, no matter where it is stored, in the mind or in a text document or on a memory chip. It represents the same account. So what if technology helps us with details that are otherwise difficult to visualize? Accuracy is really all they are making criminal, it has nothing to do with memory itself, otherwise our memories would put us in jail, because we have illegal images of our past written on our mental hard drive. Remember masturbating when you were under age? Ooops, illegal image! Better not tell anyone about that or even joke, that's kiddy porn content.





    Maybe the relationship wasn't really that special to you. Maybe it was, but you refuse to summon your lovemap of those special times. Maybe you have a memory problem. Maybe this person did something to you that created terrible memories that have mired the initial feelings. Perhaps you have brain damage. Lots of things can cause you to forget or cause it to be altered or difficult to recall. When it comes to our lovemaps, we don't forget. That's the general rule.

    I personally remember every one I had sex with. I can picture it like it was really occurring. Some of these people I would never ever, ever be in a relationship again, but I can recall some very, very hot moments that indeed are turn ons. I made a pact with myself very early in life, do not bullshit myself. I think that has had an effect on my sacred view of memory.
    There is a difference between fondly remembering your first time, where you were a young person and you fucked another young person, and being attracted to children as an adult.

    For the record, I don't have a memory problem. If you want to know, I remember the exact radial lines in his eyes and the exact pattern of heat flushes on his skin. But I'm 3 years older. The emotional significance of that memory is still with me, but I'm not there any more.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by visceral_instinct View Post
    There is a difference between fondly remembering your first time, where you were a young person and you fucked another young person, and being attracted to children as an adult.

    For the record, I don't have a memory problem. If you want to know, I remember the exact radial lines in his eyes and the exact pattern of heat flushes on his skin. But I'm 3 years older. The emotional significance of that memory is still with me, but I'm not there any more.
    I don't think that anyone is where they were. Perhaps it's more of liking certain memories so much that one would like to have similar ones.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by swarm View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ancientregime
    You are missing the point.
    No, you are missing the point. He did the crime and the courts found him guilty.
    Personally, I think there are 2 good points here:
    1- As you say.
    2- ancientregime believes that his friend would have been jailed whether or not he'd had sex with the girl. I don't agree that it was a certainty or even necessarily probable, but I acknowledge that it's possible.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. By Nisus in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 08-05-09, 04:11 AM
    Replies: 155
  2. By greenberg in forum General Philosophy
    Last Post: 03-16-08, 12:53 AM
    Replies: 60
  3. By Buffalo Roam in forum Politics
    Last Post: 09-02-07, 09:42 PM
    Replies: 21
  4. By gendanken in forum Human Science
    Last Post: 09-16-05, 12:04 PM
    Replies: 30
  5. By §outh§tar in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 06-27-05, 01:55 PM
    Replies: 119

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •