Pedophiles, Ephebophiles and Just Creeps: Let's Go Over it one more time...

[Sampiro]

The words and the sentiments have come up before on the boards, but they're getting on my nerves again.

The blogs and other web pages and various parent-activists are raising hell over people who are turned on by these pics of Daniel Radcliffe and his nude appearance onstage to begin with. Personally I think that Radcliffe's whole purpose in doing the play (because he certainly doesn't need the money) is the donning of his manly gowns by shirking his drawers, but whatever the case- it's not pedophilia to say "The boy's hot".

Now personally I don't think Daniel is that hot other than in the way young men without blemish and with nice tone are hot. I'm more attracted to guys who have a few more years between them and the First Pube and to guys who have a little more meat on their bones (i.e. not so much about the twinks), BUT I don't think anybody who IS attracted to him is sick. Now, that's attracted to, not planning on making a pass at.

I think that Mark Foley was a creepy old bastard who deserved to be exposed. It has relatively little to do with the fact he thought some 16 and 17 year olds were attractive, it has everything to do with the fact he acted on said attraction. In addition to being highly inappropriate to trying to shag someone who's not even old enough to vote, it was sexual harassment and otherwise an abuse of power. It doesn't make Foley a pedophile (a word that was tossed around constantly at the time) and whether it makes him an ephebophile or not depends largely on the 16/17 year old's physical maturity.

There are some 16 and 17 year olds who are hot- that's just a fact. Britney Spears was turning more than a few way-way-older-than-she-was male heads at that age, so was Lindsay Lohan, etc.. There's not a city in America- not even in the most Mormon spot in Utah or the most conservative Catholic neighborhood of New Orleans- where a good percentage of the 16 and 17 year olds aren't sexually active. There's not a city in America where there haven't been marriages between men twice that age or better and said teenaged girls. (James Doohan of STAR TREK comes to mind- he married his last wife when he was in his mid 50s and she was 17.) Both gay and straight porn feature copious titles and studios that openly exploit the "barely legal" status of their performers (the legal age for porn being 18). GIRLS GONE WILD certainly doesn't tend to go after the Sex in the City thirty year old professional type wild gals and the guy who produces the videos is a millionaire many times over.

Now personally I consider 17 years old WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too young to date or even shag even if it is consentual and in a place where that is past the age of consent. Personally I would not date a 20 year old. (A couple of years ago I had a fling with a 21 year old and felt tremendous guilt by it even though he was the agressor and he was brilliant and very mature, and the relationship ended because I couldn't take the age difference.) I would be extremely upset if any friends my age or even significantly younger (I'm 40) were to date an 18 year old. BUT, lookin's another thing entirely.

What irritates me is people who condemn Mark Foley or the "Damn, Harry Potter guy is fine!" folks as "pedophiles" is that they clearly don't know what the term means. When the Foley scandal was the big topic even John Walsh, a man who's son was abducted and murdered by a pedophile, was using the term towards a man who, while most certainly a shitbag who deserved censure, was not one. Walsh also, as did many other columnists and pundits, added a Seinfeld "not that there's anything wrong with that" twist with "Now I want to make it clear that I'm not saying gay men are more likely to be pedophiles or that the fact Foley was attracted to boys was because he's gay. He's the exception".

Alright, Foley was attracted to post-pubescant boys. That makes him either an ephebophile or a creep, dependent upon how post-pubescant they were. In the first place he's not a pedophile. In the second place, FUCK YES IT MOST CERTAINLY IS RELEVANT THAT FOLEY'S GAY, because if he were straight he'd probably have the same self-destructive hang-up about 16 year old girls.

It is not uncommon for a pedophile to be completely heterosexual in his adult sexual orientation but focused upon (in the recent case of Devlin) 11 year old boys in their pedophilic sex drive. (I've no idea if Devlin was gay or straight in adult sexual encounters.) Some pedophiles are homosexual in their adult sex drives and probably constitute about the same precent of pedophiles as they do most of the rest of the population (a single digit percentage); I've no idea if there are "gay in adult drive" pedophiles who molest girls but it wouldn't terribly surprise me and it's almost irrelevant.

Ephebophiles- people who are attracted to adolescent or pubescant or immediately post-pubescant youths, are almost invariably attracted to the same gender of youth as the gender of adults they're attracted to. It's a different critter of sexual aberration; it's still a perversion, it's still a pathology even, but it is very definitely linked to adult sexual orientation. Gay ephebophiles (many of th priests involved in scandals, possibly Mark Foley) will be attracted to adolescent boys, straight ephebophiles (Juan Peron, Charlie Chaplin) will be attracted to adolescent girls.

When it comes to sexually mature (and that's very important qualification- sexually mature, not emotionally mature) youths, it's neither ephebophilia or pedophilia but just flat out garden variety "whatever your regular orientation is" horniness that's the governor. You're probably more unusual if you DON'T occasionally notice 17 year old hotties than if you do (particularly the closer you are to 17), it's only when you ACT upon the attraction that it makes you irresponsible or vile. (And even that is cultural; we've reached a point in civilization where it's far more reasonable for a grown man to date/marry a 20 something woman than a teenager, though for most of history it was not the least unusual for 30 year old men to marry women half their age.)

Anyway, this is disjointed and pointless, but the complete ignorance people seem to have on what constitutes a pedophile and what's appropriate bugs the shit out of me. OF COURSE ADULTS ARE ATTRACTED TO ATTRACTIVE NEKKID TEENAGERS! WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE! IT'S ON OUR [no pun intended] HARD DRIVE! IT'S NOT A PERVERSION AND TRUTH BE KNOWN THOSE WHO ARE GETTING SO WORKED UP OVER IT ARE PROBABLY WANKING LIKE MONKEYS ON ECSTACY WHEN THE DOOR CLOSES!

And people like Larry King, John Walsh, etc., don't do gays any favors by repeating total bullshit about how his sexuality has nothing to do with going after young guys. OF COURSE IT DOES. It's quite alright to say "That closeted middle aged gay Congressman is a slimeball piece of shit for going after teenagers"- it makes you closeted-middle-aged-Congressman-slimeball-piece-of-shit-ophobic, not homophobic, but more importantly it makes you "correct".

[Mr. Cellophane]Hope I haven't taken up too much of your time.[/Mr. Cellophane]

[WhyNot]

Generally, I agree with your post, and I did actually read it all!

The one thing I feel compelled to emphasize (being one of those dirty old women lusting over Mr. Radcliffe recently) is that I don't think that in his particular case "ephebophile" is even technically correct. Not only is he over the age of consent in his country (and in my state), but he is physically far beyond the beginnings or even the middlings of puberty. As noted elsewhere, he has far more body hair than most men his age (heck, he has more body hair than most 25 year olds I know!), he has also been working out very extensively to build more muscle mass than is normal for his body type and age. If you didn't know his age, it wouldn't be outrageous to guess him at 23 or 24 - well into "just normal horniness". (Although still not within my personal realm of "datable".)

Again, I agree that were I to meet the young man, I would of course not pursue him! I might invite him over to play XBox with my 14 year old son, and giggle with my girlfriends in the kitchen, but I'm not so creepy as to actually pursue a relationship with a 17 year old while I'm at the ripe old age of 32.

[Bear_Nenno]

Originally Posted by Sampiro

The blogs and other web pages and various parent-activists are raising hell over people who are turned on by these pics of Daniel Radcliffe and his nude appearance onstage to begin with.

Dont know about Radcliffe, but that horse is pretty hott.

[Zebra]

I think the parents are upset because their young daughters will see the photos and they may think sexual thoughts about Harry Potter. Then they may figure out what to do with that magic wand.

[Polycarp]

Very nice job!

Anyone want to define "ephebophile," though? My impression is that I've been using the term correctly, and using it to mean: "attracted to a boy/young man past the age of puberty but still in the process of physical maturation." In other words, "that 14- or 16-year-old has already developed his gonads and groinal secondary sexual characteristics pretty much to adult specs., with some fine-tuning due, but he hasn't yet filled out muscularity-wise or got his full adult complement of body hair yet. He's still boyish in appearance, not manly."

I also take the rather nitpicky side note that "ephebophile" as coined refers to attraction to young males; "hebephile" to adolescent females. And that neither, strictly speaking, are the same paraphilia as pedophilia; only in a legal sense, and possibly in a more tenuous psychological sense, are they related.

[xanthous]

When I saw Harry Potter in the bathtub in The Goblet of Fire, I thought, "Well, hello there, Harry!" So shoot me. Pretty much every attractive guy used to be a cute little boy. Cute little boys grow up and evolve into attractive guys. It's not like little boys build a cocoon and come out 3 weeks later as an attractive older guy. There's that in between period: attractive young-ish guy. I have no problem with thinking a young guy's hot. And I'm sure the director knew exactly what he was doing when he shot that bathtub scene. Girls (and some women) are gonna like the boy with his shirt off. That's how attraction works. So there.

[Sampiro]

Originally Posted by Bear_Nenno

Dont know about Radcliffe, but that horse is pretty hott.

Bear Nenno is not saying that ALL male Dopers are sexually attracted to male horses, that is totally incidental.

[Slithy Tove]

Control the language and you control the battle. The warriors against Homosexuality would love to conflate it with child molestation. Just in case some kid out there is feeling sweetly toward other boys as he starts puberty, he can be "brought into the light' out of fear that if he explores these urges, he'll then slide right into rape, torture and murder of small children. The revulsion at this latter impulse is so strong and perfectly natural, it would be a shame to let it go to waste, don't you think?

[CaerieD]

Originally Posted by Sampiro

Bear Nenno is not saying that ALL male Dopers are sexually attracted to male horses, that is totally incidental.

I do have to point out that the horse in Equus is being played by Will Kemp. I may not be a male Doper, but that's an equine I wouldn't mind riding. Now, I can make my trip to Hell go even faster by combining my dirty thoughts of Will Kemp and Daniel Radcliffe!

Er, what was that? Perverts? Seventeen year old boys? Right, right. Terrible business.

Seriously, though, I'd say that someone who looks physically adult--as most 17 year olds do, because there's no magical physical change between 17 and 18--isn't even in the same category as directly post-pubescent children. If he's got more body hair and better defined muscles than most of the guys I've dated in the past five years, I may look. I may admire. I may also be a responsible adult and recognize that even if he appeared on my doorstep that's all I'm going to do.

[Celyn]

Originally Posted by CaerieD

.........., because there's no magical physical change between 17 and 18--...........

Well, isn't Radliffe British and therefore over the age of consent (16 whether homo or hetero) anyway?

[D_Odds]

Alright, I read the OP. Let me see if I understand what you're saying...

Scotty was a pedophile?




d & r

[CaerieD]

Yes, he is, and he would be in most of the US, though not here in Wisconsin. Most people see eighteen as a more acceptable age, though, even if it's sometimes older than the actual age of consent.

ETA: I should've used preview. That was in reference to the question about Radcliffe's legality, not Scotty's pedophilia.

[LifeOnWry]

My only issue with this whole Radcliffe business isn't that I'm 42 and he's 17 - I'm old, not blind, and have no intention of touching the lovely lad anyway. It's that my DAUGHTER is about to turn 17 and I'm suddenly faced with direct evidence that some 17-year-olds are inspiring admiring glances for what is really nothing more than their physical development. As it is, her appearance has been admired by men far too old for her to date, and the fact that she looks like she might be a good bit older than she actually is makes me nervous. I can totally understand why men look at her, she's gorgeous, if I do say so myself; I just want to make sure men that DO admire her feel guilty for it

[WhyNot]

Originally Posted by LifeOnWry

My only issue with this whole Radcliffe business isn't that I'm 42 and he's 17 - I'm old, not blind, and have no intention of touching the lovely lad anyway. It's that my DAUGHTER is about to turn 17 and I'm suddenly faced with direct evidence that some 17-year-olds are inspiring admiring glances for what is really nothing more than their physical development. As it is, her appearance has been admired by men far too old for her to date, and the fact that she looks like she might be a good bit older than she actually is makes me nervous. I can totally understand why men look at her, she's gorgeous, if I do say so myself; I just want to make sure men that DO admire her feel guilty for it

Try it on when it's an opposite gender kid! I in no way, ever, not once have been tempted to touch my son inappropriately and never ever would. But they hit this age where they suddenly look an awful lot like this guy you once fell in love with, and not just in the nose, y'know? Oogy.

[LifeOnWry]

Originally Posted by WhyNot

Try it on when it's an opposite gender kid! I in no way, ever, not once have been tempted to touch my son inappropriately and never ever would. But they hit this age where they suddenly look an awful lot like this guy you once fell in love with, and not just in the nose, y'know? Oogy.

Hee! As one of my friends said recently, "Whe I run into my 16-year-old son on the stairs and he's forgotten his towel again, 99.5% percent of my brain suddenly becomes very interested in carpet lint, while the other .5% thinks, 'damn, my boy is buff.'"

[Polycarp]

Originally Posted by D_Odds

Alright, I read the OP. Let me see if I understand what you're saying...

Scotty was a pedophile?




d & r

"Cap'n, I'm gettin' all I can outa her. If I give her any more, she's gonna blow!"

[ivylass]

It's like admiring a fine piece of art. We are expressing our admiration at the beauty. It doesn't mean there's anything sexual about it. Michaelangelo's David takes my breath away, and not because it's a statue of a nekkid man.

[Bear_Nenno]

Originally Posted by Sampiro

Bear Nenno is not saying that ALL male Dopers are sexually attracted to male horses, that is totally incidental.

Wait! It's a male horse? Oh, Fuck. That changes everything.

[Bryan Ekers]

Originally Posted by Bear_Nenno

Dont know about Radcliffe, but that horse is pretty hott.

What's he hung like?

[GaWd]

Let me add one more serious bitch I have about our society today:

Those who comb through the local Megan's Law databases and place their hands on their cheeks while screaming like McAuley Culkin and say in full-on prideful ignorance, "I looked up our zipcode and we have THIS MANY pedophiles in our neighborhood! Can you believe they let those monsters out of prison at all?"

Since most offenders in the database aren't pedophiles, and are more likely rapists of adults/peers, date-rapists, statutory rapists, etc., This drives me absolutely fucking bonkers.

And you're better off just letting it pass than correcting these alarmist dumbfucks. To them, a registered offender is always a pedophile.

Sam

[Cat Whisperer]

So, when do you figure Daniel Radcliffe lost his virginity? Somewhere around 12? The day he got his first bona fide boner? That is one young man who doesn't have to work very hard for the pootie. (I think the age of consent is 14 in Canada, just for the record.)

There are a lot of crap opinions and information about youthful sexuality, in my opinion. Heck, let's just make that sexuality, period, and be done with it.

[outlierrn]

Yeah, this kinda crap gets on my nerves too. I read a review of Notes on a Scandal in my local paper yesterday. Cate Blanchett gets it on with a 15 year old student who persued her despite her initial rejection, and lies about his family life to engender sympathy, but they refered to it as pedophilia, pisses me right off.

[DrDeth]

You know dudes, I saw some of the porno films of Traci Lords before they banned them. She was hot, and if that makes me a pervert, let me get in that line over there with the other 99% of red-blooded hetero males.

Once you paint with a brush so damn wide it includes almost everyone, then the name you're calling becomes meaningless.

Although I can't say a nekkid Harry Potter does much for me, if he turns you on, then fine by me.

Now, sure, if you do anything about that, it could be illegal depending on what juristiction and year it is. But it wasn't so long ago that anyone having gay sex with anyone was a dangerous criminal pervert and men having sex with 14yo was normal.

[Tully Mars]

Originally Posted by Bear_Nenno

Wait! It's a male horse? Oh, Fuck. That changes everything.

The age of consent for horses in most states is 3, so you should be okay.

[FriarTed]

Originally Posted by Sampiro

Bear Nenno is not saying that ALL male Dopers are sexually attracted to male horses, that is totally incidental.

Not, of course, that there's anything wrong with that!

[Dijon Warlock]

Originally Posted by Sampiro

John Walsh, a man who's son was abducted and murdered by a pedophile

Just out of curiosity, do you have a cite for this?

From what I've always read, this murder has never been solved, and since they only recovered the son's severed head, there was no evidence of sexual assault found.

The contention that he was abducted and killed by a pedophile was propogated by Mr. Walsh himself for years, but I think he eventually quit claiming that since there has never been any evidence or proof of it.

Abducted and killed, no doubt. By a pedophile? No evidence. If such people are rightly deserving of our condemnation, we shouldn't have to make up reasons for it. Accusing someone of this crime with no proof or evidence is nothing but hatemongering.

I could swear Cecil did a column on this, but I can't find it anymore.

[zelie zelerton]

Originally Posted by ivylass

It's like admiring a fine piece of art. We are expressing our admiration at the beauty. It doesn't mean there's anything sexual about it. Michaelangelo's David takes my breath away, and not because it's a statue of a nekkid man.

That pretty much sums up my attitude too. He's a beautiful specimen of humanity and i can see that he's hot. I can also see that other teen celebrities are hot, both boys and girl. None of that means i want to have any sexual involvement with them. I'm puzzled that people don't get this.

[rayh]

Originally Posted by ivylass

It's like admiring a fine piece of art. We are expressing our admiration at the beauty. It doesn't mean there's anything sexual about it.

Rubbish!

You'd drop your panties in a minute if he asked, we all know that.

Sluts the lot of you.

I'm shocked and stunned. I really am. Shocked and stunned.

[ivylass]

No, I wouldn't. He's too young for me and I'm happily married. I can still admire what a fine young man he's turning into there.

Nice whoosh, there rayh. Get your mind out of the gutter.

[Sampiro]

Originally Posted by Dijon Warlock

Just out of curiosity, do you have a cite for this?

I'm going on Walsh's own words and the death row confessions of Ottis Toole. You're quite right that nobody was ever convicted of Adam's murder, but Walsh very clearly he was the victim of a pedophile, it most definitely seems a reasonable theory, and as a man who has dedicated his life ever since to hunting for missing children and the accumulation of data on pedophiles one would think Walsh would certainly know what a pedophile is and that a man who lusts after 17 year old interns is not one (at least not necessarily).

[FriarTed]

Originally Posted by Sampiro

I'm going on Walsh's own words and the death row confessions of Ottis Toole. You're quite right that nobody was ever convicted of Adam's murder, but Walsh very clearly he was the victim of a pedophile, it most definitely seems a reasonable theory, and as a man who has dedicated his life ever since to hunting for missing children and the accumulation of data on pedophiles one would think Walsh would certainly know what a pedophile is and that a man who lusts after 17 year old interns is not one (at least not necessarily).

Pedophilia may have been among Toole's array of evils, but even if so, he wasn't predominantly a pedophile who happened to kill, but a killer who happened to
be a pedophile.

[Otto]

You know what? If Daniel Radcliffe showed up on my doorstep and offered himself up, I'd nail him and I'm not the least bit apologetic about it. Fuck all this "oh yes, I can certainly admire him as if he were a precious watercolor lily" bullshit. I'm in my late 30s and if saying I'd fuck a hot willing 17 year-old makes me a pervert in someone's eyes then that's their damage, not mine.

[Infovore]

Originally Posted by FriarTed

Pedophilia may have been among Toole's array of evils, but even if so, he wasn't predominantly a pedophile who happened to kill, but a killer who happened to
be a pedophile.

Lately (as in the past few days) there's been some suggestion that Jeffrey Dahmer might have been responsible for Adam Walsh's death.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Zebra

I think the parents are upset because their young daughters will see the photos and they may think sexual thoughts about Harry Potter. Then they may figure out what to do with that magic wand.

[nanny ogg]

The wizard's staff has a knob on the end, knob on the end, knob on the end . . .

[/no]

[descamisado]

Originally Posted by Otto

You know what? If Daniel Radcliffe showed up on my doorstep and offered himself up, I'd nail him and I'm not the least bit apologetic about it. Fuck all this "oh yes, I can certainly admire him as if he were a precious watercolor lily" bullshit. I'm in my late 30s and if saying I'd fuck a hot willing 17 year-old makes me a pervert in someone's eyes then that's their damage, not mine.

Thank you, Otto, I totally agree with youl whomever of you may vilify me for my opinion, go ahead.

I remember when I saw that bathub scene (in whichever HP movie it was), my first thought was of hotness (has been for a while).

My second thought was that this scene was not staged with Harry, wet and slick and glistenting, in a bathtub for no reason. Now, the film makers were probably going for a certain young and female crowd with that choice, but if you create hotness, don't be surpised and shocked when it effect (and effectiveness) spills over.

And, further, there have been several male and female persons younger than Daniel Radcliffe whom I've looked at and admired and had to remark to myself, "He/she is certainly going to be a heartbreaker someday." Who hasn't?

[descamisado]

Originally Posted by Otto

You know what? If Daniel Radcliffe showed up on my doorstep and offered himself up, I'd nail him and I'm not the least bit apologetic about it. Fuck all this "oh yes, I can certainly admire him as if he were a precious watercolor lily" bullshit. I'm in my late 30s and if saying I'd fuck a hot willing 17 year-old makes me a pervert in someone's eyes then that's their damage, not mine.

Thank you, Otto, I totally agree with you; whomever of you may vilify me for my opinion, go ahead.

I remember when I saw that bathub scene (in whichever HP movie it was), my first thought was of hotness (has been for a while).

My second thought was that this scene was not staged with Harry, wet and slick and glistenting, in a bathtub for no reason. Now, the film makers were probably going for a certain young and female crowd with that choice, but if you create hotness, don't be surpised and shocked when it effect (and effectiveness) spills over.

And, further, there have been several male and female persons younger than Daniel Radcliffe whom I've looked at and admired and had to remark to myself, "He/she is certainly going to be a heartbreaker someday." Who hasn't?

And, further, there have been several male and female persons younger than Daniel Radcliffe whom I've looked at and admired and had to remark to myself, "He/she is certainly going to be a heartbreaker someday." Who hasn't?
And, further, there have been several male and female persons younger than Daniel Radcliffe whom I've looked at and admired and had to remark to myself, "He/she is certainly going to be a heartbreaker someday." Who hasn't?

[descamisado]

Originally Posted by Otto

You know what? If Daniel Radcliffe showed up on my doorstep and offered himself up, I'd nail him and I'm not the least bit apologetic about it. Fuck all this "oh yes, I can certainly admire him as if he were a precious watercolor lily" bullshit. I'm in my late 30s and if saying I'd fuck a hot willing 17 year-old makes me a pervert in someone's eyes then that's their damage, not mine.

Thank you, Otto, I totally agree with you; whomever of you may vilify me for my opinion, go ahead.

I remember when I saw that bathub scene (in whichever HP movie it was), my first thought was of hotness (has been for a while).

My second thought was that this scene was not staged with Harry, wet and slick and glistenting, in a bathtub for no reason. Now, the film makers were probably going for a certain young and female crowd with that choice, but if you create hotness, don't be surpised and shocked when it effect (and effectiveness) spills over.

And, further, there have been several male and female persons younger than Daniel Radcliffe whom I've looked at and admired and had to remark to myself, "He/she is certainly going to be a heartbreaker someday." Who hasn't?

[Bear_Nenno]

And, further, there have been several female persons younger than Daniel Radcliffe whom I've looked at and admired and had to remark to myself, "She is certainly going to be a heartbreaker someday." Who hasn't?
And, further, there have been several female persons younger than Daniel Radcliffe whom I've looked at and admired and had to remark to myself, "She is certainly going to be a heartbreaker someday." Who hasn't?
And, further, there have been several female persons younger than Daniel Radcliffe whom I've looked at and admired and had to remark to myself, "She is certainly going to be a heartbreaker someday." Who hasn't?

[descamisado]

And I have no idea what's going on with Post #38.

[ladyfoxfyre]

And, further.....

[Sampiro]

Originally Posted by Otto

You know what? If Daniel Radcliffe showed up on my doorstep and offered himself up, I'd nail him and I'm not the least bit apologetic about it. Fuck all this "oh yes, I can certainly admire him as if he were a precious watercolor lily" bullshit. I'm in my late 30s and if saying I'd fuck a hot willing 17 year-old makes me a pervert in someone's eyes then that's their damage, not mine.

Whether or not I'd call you a pervert would depend strictly upon what happened, so I'd really need to see the video to make an accurate judgment. If you didn't share the video then I'm afraid I'd have to label you a pervert.

[Bear_Nenno]

Originally Posted by 5-4-Fighting

And I have no idea what's going on with Post #38.

First you need to figure out what's going on with Posts 35, 36, and 37.

[descamisado]

Originally Posted by Bear_Nenno

First you need to figure out what's going on with Posts 35, 36, and 37.

Don't run the server or the site, sorry.

[Annie]

Originally Posted by Sampiro

Whether or not I'd call you a pervert would depend strictly upon what happened, so I'd really need to see the video to make an accurate judgment. If you didn't share the video then I'm afraid I'd have to label you a pervert.

Did Daniel bring the horse? That would be pervy.

[Hogwash]

This thread is giving me the ephebehebejeebees.

[Polycarp]

Originally Posted by 5-4-Fighting

And I have no idea what's going on with Post #38.

There's never a wish better than this, when you've only got five minutes to edit.

(You can report the problem to a moderator by clicking on the exclamation-point-in-a-triangle in any post but your own, and noting which post(s) of your own is/are the problem(s), as well, of course, as reporting a problem-needing-fixing or rule break of someone else's by reporting their post.)

[JRDelirious]

Stop looking at those pictures, 5-4-Fighting, your hand is shaky on the mouse...

I'm with those who would think no less of any gay male or het female who'd take up Mr. Radcliffe on the offer, regardless of age difference, if that's what the young man were into. I wish I had looked like that at 17, I would have had to bat the girls off with a stick. And surely a few of their mothers. But I would have let some get through...

I always wondered about things on the web like the "countdown clock to age 18" for personalities like Britney, the Olsens, etc. Like, what, upon that date does the reader of the site stop being 30 years older than his object-of-lust? Really! This seems influenced greatly by a dissonance in our pop media's minds. They do not seem to wish to abandon the erotification of youth (what was Britney Spears in Baby One More Time selling, if not a common jailbait fantasy?) but at the same time they want to claim righteousness. So they do that by expanding the definition of "child" upward and showing how strongly they hate and loathe the pervs and will go after them (e.g. Dateline NBC: To Catch a Predator) which includes going excluded-middle absolutist in trying to ID as a "pedophile" or "child predator" anyone who decides to poach in the teenage range.

But since that directly clashes with the fact that our culture has been seeing teens as fair subjects of desire for centuries (from the epheboi to 14-year-old Juliet to Lindsay Lohan), that forces them to act as if hitting 18 performs some sort of transubstantiation.

Part of the problem with removing the "pedophile" label and allowing a "look all you want but don't touch" approach to the 15-17 group as category for those of a certain age, is that it would be admitting that the interest is NOT metaphysically "evil", just unethical to act upon under our construct of morality. And a large part of our culture either (a) just plain and simply considers that an insufficient deterrent, or (b) is indeed emotionally and viscerally offended and sickened by the very idea; and in either case, would rather label the guy ogling the 16-year-olds a "pedophile" so they can be sure he feels like dirt even before he starts thinking about it, and so they can feel righteous.

[Triskadecamus]

Originally Posted by 5-4-Fighting

My second thought was that this scene was not staged with Harry, wet and slick and glistenting, in a bathtub for no reason. Now, the film makers were probably going for a certain young and female crowd with that choice,

Yeah, 'cause we all know that none of the producers in Hollywood are like gay, or anything. (Not that . . . etc.)

Tris

[Cat Whisperer]

Ephebehebejeebees is my new favourite word.

[Nava]

Soon as I saw the "Daniel Radcliffe" I thought "isn't he like 17? Figure he has hair already..." Heck yeah, more than my brothers and they're in their '30s.

A pedophile would find him waaaay too old