That’s seepage
Nope, that’s not it at all.
Before I got into this thread, I was debating him in the Youth Suffrage thread, and it has been aggravating. He rejects rational arguments out of hand as being irrelevant, accuses his opponents of being morally equal with slaveholders and male chauvinists, and does his best to sound as condescending and combative as possible. I don’t think I’ll engage him anymore. To paraphrase Barney Frank, debating with him is like debating with a dining room table.
I posted in that thread too, because I do think the voting age (and similar age restrictions) should be lowered or eliminated. I had the same result you did. Maybe it would be different if teenagers were his ‘thing.’
And I don’t like what you’re saying about my dining room table. 
I don’t know what this means.
Cesario, I think you’re an asshole.
I don’t think you’re an asshole because you’re a pedo. I think you’re an asshole because you’re an asshole.
And also because he’s a pedo.
Naah, he’d still be an asshole even if he wasn’t a baby-raper.
Glib is not equivalent to convincing. Nothing is cleared up. What do you contend I have misunderstood? That you are trying to legitimize adults having sex with children? That you do not see it as wrong? Or that you would not fuck a child if you could get away with it?
From your post and his, I would guess your inherent accusation–that he “would have sex with a child if [he] could get away with it”. At least, that’s how I read it.
There is an area in the Berkeley hills where I would like to put the top down some summer day and drive very fast through all the lovely twisting corners. Being fraught with low visibility, bicyclists and other drivers, however, it would be irresponsible and dangerous for me to do so. I would like the situation to be changed (e.g. with the removal of bikers and other people) so that I could do this safely and without putting anyone in jeopardy. I would not do so just because I thought I could “get away with it”. That’s very different, with a different and substantially more negative insinuation.
Unless, of course, I have completely misunderstood your postings.
Would you rape someone if you could get away with it?
Your analogy is unfortunately irrelevant.
For starters, you are not arguing that the other people using that road are willing participants in your desired activities. Also, in your case the people involved would be able to make such a decision to participate.
As such, I’d prefer if Cesario would actually answer my questions.
No, but so what? His position is–or appears to be, at least–that it would be possible to create some kind of society where children would be a) capable of informed consent and b) wish to give this consent to him. This is not rape, unless I am missing something.
From what I have seen–I admit, since he posted like six times against what I imagine was the character limit, that I may have missed it–he would not have sex with children just because he could get away with it. Suggesting otherwise is disingenuous, although for the record I don’t actually believe that it’s reasonable to suggest that children can consent.
Why, should I want to rape people?
(edit: I’m not saying the analogy is a parallel. I’m saying that there is a difference between wanting something to be possible and wanting to do it just because you can get away with it. Unless you disagree?)
Only if they wanted me to.
Alex Osaki,
You do understand that Cesario is not especially attracted to 12 year olds? They are too old for his tastes.
Ss can you imagine having sex “safely” with a 5 year old? Safe and non-injurious to both you and the 5 year old?
Your analogy is even remotely comparable to Cesario’s unfulfilled desires.
I do not think it should have to be said by sane, reasonable people (which I like to think I am) that they do not approve of having sex with children. I will go so far as to say I cannot conceive of a world in which having sex with a five year old is acceptable. I do not agree with Cesario, something which I also would like to think should not need to be explicitly stated by sane, reasonable people.
It is, however, incorrect and, I think, disingenuous to confuse his motives, unless I am misunderstanding them, when he seems to have said explicitly that he would not have sex with children simply because he could “get away with it,” it would take a restructuring of society (which will not happen, since I apparently need to be explicit in saying that I don’t believe in having sex with 5 year olds) because he feels “it is irresponsible to potentially expose a child to the lifetime of social torture that would result from even a positive, mutually desired encounter”.
Of course it is possible that given his inclinations, being disingenuous is the least of your concerns. I wouldn’t begrudge you that, but I share MrDibble’s concerns from upthread–that he is giving a better account of himself than the rest of us.
So Cesario has insane, irrational beliefs, but is doing a fine job of defending them?
Cesario has a pathological belief structure which cannot be shaken, so perhaps you are correct that we are looking rather poorly trying to talk him out of a dangerous obsession that has no possibility of existence in the real world. I am not a psychological professional. If I was one, odds are I wouldn’t be posting at all as I would probably better understand the futility of trying to shake Cesario’s world view.
So I am reduced to posting somewhat angry comments aimed at other posters who wish to treat Cesario’s beliefs as social concepts worthy of consideration. They are not. Sex between an adult and a 5 year old: ok or not? is not worthy of debate.
Since I don’t really have anything more that seems worth adding, and perhaps I’ve already gone past that point, I don’t think I’ll be posting in this thread anymore.
Jeez, people, there’s more to sex than penetration. Use your imagination … or not. But even the often-cited Greek paederasts didn’t do anal as often as you might think, apparently.
Went down pretty well, actually. Sure, there’s usually a rocky start, but eventually things work out in the end.
It’s good that you don’t speak for me, because this is about the farthest thing from my experience ever. When I chat with a woman I find sexually attractive, I’m first and foremost thinking about the chat, enjoying her company, and appreciating the view. While the thought of getting her into bed does cross my mind, it is hardly the focus of my thoughts.
Do you consider nonsexual relationships inherently meaningless?
Not met many overprotective types?
Then she wouldn’t agree to it or pass the RMSC, so we wouldn’t be involved in the first place. Simple solution.
Well, if not by the experience of having an orgasm, certainly by the experience of having her father murder someone in her name because of something she desired and enjoyed.
Three points on this one:
-
While I appreciate the attempted compliment on the state of my assets, once a child gets past the point where you refer to their age in months, their forearms have pretty well outstripped my penis in terms of both length and girth.
-
Have you seen the fisting thread in IMHO? The vagina, when fully grown, is designed to stretch far enough to accomodate a human head, after all.
-
Not every sex act boils down to “insert tab A into slot B”. Most of my sexual fantasies, for example, involve cunnilingus more than intercourse.
So since lots of adults are traumatized by it, why not outlaw adults having sex? Is there a valid reason for not doing so that won’t apply equally well to children?
Where are you getting this idea that I’ve deluded myself into thinking they want me to fuck them? This discussion is entirely hypothetical, and the hypothetical is premised on an enthusiastically interested child, yes, but why do people seem to assume I consider every child out there enthusiastically interested in me?
Me, I think what’s relevant is that she said “no”.
Hm, not needing to shave off the beard growth would be nice, but the side-effects you mention just don’t seem worth it. Ah well, thanks for thinking of me.
While we disagree on the specific cause, you do recognize that we are completely on the same page in regards to the outcome and the moral acceptability of that outcome, yes?
If you hadn’t cut off the paragraph, we’d have a far more reasonable standard to go with. I most certainly can find an example where the only thing wrong with the case was that someone was murdered that I think we’ll both agree was wrong. Would you like me to find one for you?
And by declaring it a stupid strategy, I’m implicitly suggesting that it isn’t the one I’m employing.
Once again, there’s nothing to justify about me. Plenty that needs to be done to resolve some misinformation people have been laboring under, and a good deal that needs to be done with regards to the liberation of minors, but as far as me, there’s nothing that needs to be justified.
I want to have sex with children age 10 and under who are both capable of informed consent, and enthusiastically interested in having sex with me. Whether such children exist is imaterial to the fact that it’s something I want. Just like the fact that we can’t make Light Sabers doesn’t mean I don’t want one.
I just figured it might be relevant to where you went to get insight into your molester. Personally, I have no particular insight to offer into the mindset of someone who’s willing to force sex on anyone.
You are aware that section was talking about unconsious coersion, right? The kind where the person has no idea they’re doing it. Are you suggesting that the person who molested you had no idea whatsoever that you felt this way, and had no way of knowing you weren’t into it?
Contrary to my usual misanthropic nature of assuming the worst of all human beings, I honestly believe (dispite how foolish it is to believe it) that the majority of people, when they hear “No, I don’t want to”, will stop. I can’t imagine not stopping dead on hearing those words regardless of my sexual partner. If the majority of humanity really doesn’t have the same reaction, maybe we do deserve to be wiped out of existence.
Same reason any rapist acts. They want to hurt someone/get off/whatever, and they don’t care who or what they rape, and children are smaller, weaker targets.
There is no “or a molester”. Someone who molests a child is a child molester period.
As for us pedophiles, not to get too far into it, I’ll make mention that I’ve got plenty of fantasies that involve being in the child’s power.
It really is just that they’re hot.
No, most child molesters are not pedophiles:
Where are you getting your figures from? That debunked Abel study again?
There are, sadly, precious few rational arguments for denying people the right to vote. At least, if you actually believe in the concept of representative government in the first place, that is.
You don’t believe that it should be “lowered or elimimated”. You argued quite vigorously against the idea of it being eliminated. You want it to be dropped to 16, but you really haven’t provided any explaination for why any arbitrary-age-line-based-on-nothing is acceptable for determining suffrage, let alone why your preferred arbitrary-age-line-based-on-nothing is better than anyone else’s.
Just “we have to draw a line somewhere”, which I also asked you to prove. You still haven’t managed to do that.
Alex has it right. I honestly didn’t think it was that confusing, but Alex has explained it perfectly if you don’t understand.
Everything is worthy of debate. Everything.