Research concerning adult/minor sexual interactions

In a culture untouched by our puritanical mores, perhaps.

The real question is, am -I- the one who has something wrong with me here? Or is it society at large? Have you ever read anything from Robert Heinlein? I just finished reading his Stranger in a Strange Land. A very interesting science fiction book. I read another sci fi book of his that dealt a little more with the issue of adult-minor sexual interactions. He's certainly not the only author to come up with different ways of seeing issues concerning sexuality either. I was just reading about a poet who had a lot of unconventional views in a 2 year old copy of The New Yorker, Percy Bysshe Shelley, "one of the major English Romantic poets", wikipedia states, who definitely had some rather unconventional views on a fair amount of things, including sexuality; he eloped with a 16 year old, much to the chagrin of his relatively well off parents, who cut him off.

There are also psychological differences, but perhaps most importantly, our society certainly wishes to see them in a very different light in regards to sexuality.

Too young for -what-? A touch, a kiss, or sexual intercourse? I must, ofcourse, stipulate that I'm not advocating breaking the law here; I simply believe the laws should be changed. I believe ancientregime always said the same, but it didn't save him. However, the alternative is to not speak what I believe on something that I consider to be very important. So I'll take my chances. On the plus side, I think I'm a bit less abrasive then ancientregime was, so I guess I'll see how far that gets me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It generally feels nice. Many teens certainly like engaging in sexual activities. Even adults have expressed that they liked sexual interactions with others their age as well as with adults, as can be seen in studies in books such as Pedophilia: Biosocial Dimensions. You may want to learn more about the case of Vili Fualaau and Mary Kay Letourneau, as well. They even wrote a book about their romance, although I believe it's only in french.

I would argue that it is more specific and it's meant to exclude people who don't care first and foremost about the children they're attracted to.

As I've mentioned before, I believe that the term paedophile encompasses both people who do and people who don't. Because of this, I prefer the term MAA for people who are attracted to minors and who -do- care for them; the rest can stay with the paedo definition or other even less savoury titles.

I certainly agree that cheating on her husband was wrong. However, simply because she made one wrong decision doesn't mean that her love for Vili was feigned. If it was, I have a strong feeling that things would have ended after the first time she was jailed. Instead, she was jailed 2 times and shortly after her second released, she married Vili. Now -that- is what you call dedication to someone you love, from both sides of the equation.

I've met a fair amount online, yes. In person, only 1 I believe; it's not the type of thing that most people would admit to. By the way, as I believe I have mentioned to you in the past (if not, my apologies, I did mention it to someone), I -can- be attracted to people who are below the age of consent, so I would fit the bill myself. I must point out, however, that ever since I learned a fair amount about the law at the age of 21, I learned a fair amount about the law concerning adult/minor sexual interactions and I'm a fairly law abiding citizen. I am not -exclusively- attracted to people below the age of consent, however, so my case is something of a hybrid.

One must always work with the society one is in. If the current age of consent varies from 16 to 18 for adult-minor sexual interactions, perhaps a good age for now would be 16. Some minors, or young adults, pay a hooker for their first time. I did, at age 20. I would certainly have preffered a licensed instructor, but, ofcourse, that's not available at present.

I think it's already being done to some extent. The key word here is sex ed. As society becomes more comfortable with teaching sex ed, dispensing with the abstinence only education and going for a more whole approach to teaching the subject, slowly but surely, the teacher could teach more. At present, it's a scandal if a teacher gets a banana and puts a condom on it to show their students. In the future, I believe that such things and more will not be scandalous, but considered normal and good. But all in due time.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That sounds pretty religious. Don't you think so? What if i make an argument that pedophilia is a direct psychological result of the societies mentality towards sex at an early age? If anyone who reach puberty had the freedom to have sex without all these social dramas, there wouldn't have been any pedophiles in the first place. Its like you don't allow yourself to pee when you were suppose to be peeing.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I have a strong feeling I know far more people online who claim to be attracted to minors than you do. I've spoken to them concerning this very issue. A sizeable amount don't actually want to abolish the age of consent laws, especially if they're the hebephile type of MAA; that is, a Minor Attracted Adult whose primary attraction is to adolescents/teens. Some MAAs don't want the laws changed at all; I wonder if any of them are exclusively attracted to minors? I would imagine that would be a painful way of seeing things indeed; the idea that they themselves believe that the laws should never change so that they could be sexual with the only people who they consider to be sexually attractive.

A fair amount of them would certainly go for this over the present system, but there certainly has been a lot of resistance to -only- allowing people who could be defined as sexually mature to engage in sexual activities. The missing piece was in also allowing licensed and trusted teachers to teach young individuals.

Perhaps none; perhaps, as I said, people below a certain age wouldn't pass any written tests but could (in some far distant future) be allowed to engage in sexual activities with a licensed teacher or at the very least under the supervision of such. Only when they reached an age where they could pass the maturity test themselves could they be free to choose their sexual partner and/or engage in unsupervised sexual activities.

The fact that some children may not suffer long-term harm from sexual abuse in no way makes sexual abuse acceptable or desirable.[/quote]

James, I would -never- think that abuse is acceptable or desirable. The issue is whether some sexual -interactions- should be allowed that have demonstrated themselves to not be harmful, not sexual abuse.

This is -precisely- what I'm arguing against, by ensuring that atleast one sexual partner is always sexually licensed. If your argument is that adult-minor sexual interactions can be harmful even so, I would argue that there are many sexual interactions between adults that are also harmful. The key, I believe, is to try to ensure that atleast one of the sexual partipants has been licensed to engage in proper sexual interactions to help ensure that this is kept to a minimum, just as it's only legal to drive if you're licensed.

I would prefer the term 'MAA sexual teacher', thanks. I hope that by now I am making clear that not all people who are attracted to minors are alike.

If the 4 year old is a -male- (you know my objections towards an adult male/4 year old female now, I hope), then the male may find it to be fairly enjoyable. I remember reading that in a certain area of Africa, mothers would perform fellatio on infant males to get them to go to sleep. What sexual interactions are taboo is heavily cultural dependent.

No, that's only the first thing that comes to mind. There are also other factors, such as societal pressures and its extension, the law.

Perhaps the key is that, as a first step, the age of consent not be lowered at all; instead, that sex ed be ramped up and a sexual maturity test gets instituted in schools. The test could be taken when one is 16; at some point in time, the test could be substituted for the age of consent laws. Eventually, ofcourse, I think the flip side of the coin, licensed teachers (as opposed to simply a sexual license) could train minors regarding sexuality, as I have specified in my last post in response to Bells.

Not the 'fair game' terminology again >.<. I don't consider this some type of 'sport' where the idea is to poach minors. And I think you're forgetting that many minors chaff at the rules concerning sexuality imposed on them, as the recent sexting scandals have made clear:
"Sexting" Shockingly Common Among Teens

Anyway, I'm not the type of person who enjoys lobbying and such pursuits. My personal way of doing things is through discussions, such as the ones we're having here. I figure that if they get enough momentum, someone else will do what you envision. Perhaps some fairly well respected psychologist, like the one who co-created the Esptein-Dumas maturity test.

Why should I try to figure that out when the test hasn't even been hammered out yet? Why not work on tests such as Epstein-Dumas' test and, once an acceptable version concerning sexuality in particular is worked out, see who can pass it? One thing is passing it, the other is it meaning something legally. I believe that at first, the Age of Consent will stand the way it is. However, as people begin to realize that it makes much more sense to test for maturity then directly then to simply know how many times the earth has revolved around the sun since a person was born, I believe that licensing will begin to replace the age of consent laws.

Vulnerability, size, psychological differences, sociological status differences.

That's not what I said.

That's more along the lines of what I said. Ofcourse, this is in a society where such activities were supported, not condemned.

If the 4 year old were a male, all of the above might be acceptable, again in a socio-legal environment where this type of thing was supported. In the case of the female, I'm almost sure that sexual intercourse would be ruled out but I think the others could still work out in the aforementioned environment.

By spending time with the kids in other ways. Parents are obvious candidates, as they have to deal with just about everything a kid can come up with. I believe that teachers also fit the bill in a lot of ways.

I'm not advocating it per se, although there have certainly been some who have, and written books concerning the subject to boot; I linked to such a book a while back (didn't read it, just read a bit about it online). I'm simply stating that in a culture that supported such things, it could work out. Yes, I'm aware of the genetic problems in reproduction between close family members, but not all sexual interactions need be of the reproducing kind. Parents could also teach other people's kids as well.

I think you're yanking my chain

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

. But in a way, I think it could make sense, just as there are teachers for different school grades as well; since I think that teachers are one of the best candidates for such a role already, it could certainly fit.

 

That's a rather interesting theory.

 

Your definition of both terms is far from complete. In the case of Pedophilia, here's a good excerpt from wikipedia:

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), pedophilia is specified as a form of paraphilia in which a person either has acted on intense sexual urges towards children, or experiences recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about children that cause distress or interpersonal difficulty.[4]​

By this definition, if it doesn't cause distress or interpersonal difficulty and one doesn't act on it, it should be fine. I personally would argue that in an environment where consensual, well planned, adult-minor interactions were supported, I doubt there would be distress or interpersonal difficulty associated with it, or atleast not any more then more conventional relationships; in other words, the 'disease', speaks much more of the factors -creating- this distress and interpersonal difficulty, that is, most of society that condemns such relationships and hands out hefty punishments for same.

 

If I am allowed to respond, would you mind telling me the consequences of creating the age of consent laws? Has this law effectively reduced or increased sexual abuse of children? I really mean the sexual abuse. Not sexual activity.

If you don't mind me saying, the whole thing started off only because there was some dumb stupid laws which stopped humans from enjoying sex from the age of puberty in a natural way. Adults began to decide what's best to protect their kids in the name of being civilized. Same way religion works. Adults think that making their kids religious is a good things because that would teach them morals and ethics. We had religious terrorists as a direct result of that. And we have sexual predators who became what they are because of some ignorant fools twisting natural laws to fit their fantasy. Now if we allow that trend to grow, can you speculate what's about to happen in future???

 

I appreciate that there are people who prey on children. What -I'm- trying to get across is that I believe that many if not most adults who are attracted to minors do -not- prey on children's vulnerabilities.

The best definition I personally have for pedophilia is simply someone who is attracted to minors, just as a heterosexual is attracted to females or a homosexual is attracted to people of their own gender. I don't find the attraction to opposite gender, same gender or people below a center age to be 'bad' per se, but there is no question that -some- people who attracted to any of these do engage in harmful actions. I believe, however, that while one can certainly say that a rapist is heterosexual, they are also a rapist. Likewise, someone attracted to minors who actually uses force has more then just an -attraction- to minors, but a harmful way of expressing. The thing that worries me so much is that you can't seem to see that there's a difference between someone who is simply attracted to someone and someone who actually harms people they're attracted to.

-Why- do you always revert to the term 'sex'. You -know- I have certain objections to actual sexual intercourse between 4 year old females and adult males under any circumstances, for instance, and yet you seem to constantly forget this fact by reverting to the same phrase.

I personally don't think I've met anyone who's attracted to minors in a chat room. By far the biggest are recognized, legal forums, such as Girl Chat and Boy Chat, but they're not chat rooms, they're public forums, such as this one; anyone can join as far as I know, although they do insist that people are respectful. apparently there are too many other 'girl chat's for google to come up with it on its first ten entries, but the very first link when you type in 'boy chat' is the forum in question.

Maybe if people in the 'real world' spent a little more time getting to know people who are attracted to minors online, they would find that they're generally not the boogeymen that 'real worlders' believe them to be. Anyway, I'm glad you took the time to talk to -me-, atleast. Every step towards dialogue instead of demonization is, in my view, a good thing.

I wish you would quit using generalizations such as 'sex with children is harmful'. As I've said many times in the past, sex is a broad term, and so is children. Anyway, if you don't wish to speak anymore on this subject, that's your choice to make.

You seem to this is only about adults who are sexually attracted to minors. The truth of the matter, however, is that minors also have sexual desires. I don't know about you, but I remember my own childhood and adolescence, and I definitely don't remember it as being one where I had no desire.

Sexual desires, yes, but a bit different; theirs are generally newer to the world, more vulnerable. You seem to think that the biggest danger they can face are adults; I myself remember my childhood, however. The biggest danger I faced wasn't adults per se; it was society in general and its inattention to the concern of minors, especially when it came to the sexual arena. -Some- people are like beacons of light when it comes to the sexual arena in relation to minors and perhaps less directly, with adult/minor sexual interactions. I have mentioned them in the past: people like Judith Levine, with her book "Harmful to Minors", Heather Corinna and her web site Scarleteen and the authors of the book Pedophilia: Biosocial Dimensions. Despite obstacles, these people are trying to uncover the truth concerning what's -truly- beneficial for youth sexuality and how certain measures to 'protect' children can actually be quite harmful.

How are you defining 'vastly'; 10 years? 20? I'm certainly willing to admit that perhaps the majority of children only want to engage in sexual relationships with their peers. But I ask you to consider -why- that is and whether it really makes sense that children are learning so much concerning sexuality from other children, when many children aren't exactly the most informed concerning the subject. And ofcourse there is the case where children learn very little indeed concerning sexuality and whether -that- is a good thing.

I believe that this subject is a very important one. The issues that it raises may make some uncomfortable, but I would argue that that's what happens when people's basic beliefs concerning sexuality are questioned. Also, what if someone else brings the subject up again, in another thread? Must I tell them that the subject can't be discussed in a sci forum, as per your orders?

 

I don't think we have to wait; what's happening is what has always happened when faulty laws are inacted; rebellion. Much ado is made of the few adults who get 'caught' as 'sexual predators'. There are certainly a few mentally disturbed individuals who really have harmed minors, but there are also many cases where they were simply engaging in illegal consensual sexual activities, or simply viewing pictures of minors in varying states of dress. But now it's come full circle and law enforcement is arresting -minors themselves- for recording images of their -own bodies-. The absurdity is beginning to get to people and I believe that the laws may come in for review. Cases like the love affair of Vili Fualaau and Mary Kay Letourneau also make it clear that the age of consent laws are fundamentally flawed.