Right, but puberty is a process, not a flipped switch. I think most 15-year-olds are going through puberty, not post-pubescent. And I personally consider even a well-developed 16-year-old a kid.
One of my closest friends is a counsellor for sexualized children (or adults who were sexualized as children) and has repeatedly said this is one of the most difficult things to explain to them. They think that there’s something wrong with them because they enjoyed it. Our bodies are hardwired to respond pleasurably to certain sexual feelings and, particularly if there’s no actual penetration (i.e. no pain or tissue damage or blood) involved, the nerves don’t distinguish whether it’s voluntary or appropriate or not, and the fact it was in some ways enjoyable will often cause children (or adults recalling childhood molestation) to believe that on some level they encouraged or even intitiated the contact. It’s also a reason that many (especially the ones who never informed anyone or received any kind of counseling) have problems with promiscuity later.
One reason that the “enjoyment” aspect isn’t more publicized is probably because it’s EXTREMELY LIABLE for such statements to be grossly misrepresented. For example, a few years ago the APA released the results of a study stating- my paraphrase- that most people who had childhood sexual experiences and received therapy and counseling and had addressed the issue and had suffered no physical damage (and several other heavy qualifications) were able to make complete recovery psychologically and in fact many were emotionally healthier than average people; this was twisted by several polemicist pundits/politicians/preachers as “The APA has actually said child molestation makes children better adjusted!” (which is not what they said at all). You can imagine the shite storm if they released a “many enjoyed it at the time due to the pleasures of touch” study- the same people would say “APA has claimed that NAMBLA and Child Pornographers are doing a service to our children!”
I took a human sexuality psychology course in college in which we discussed some of the scientific research into the effects of child sexual abuse. It was definitely an interesting discussion…
One of the major papers discussed was “A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse (CSA) using college samples,” by Rind et al. It was published in the Journal of Sex Research. The paper’s conclusion, in a nutshell, was that the long-lasting psychological effects of sexual abuse in children is vastly exaggerated.
Of course, this attracted attention and got so far as the US House of Representatives issuing a condemnation of the scientific paper. There have been legitimate scientific objections to some of the conclusions, as well as responses from Rind et al.
I wish I still had access to Lexis-Nexis so I could dig up the papers. Oh well…I guess Wiki will have to do.
The prof teaching the course brought up the point that if people really cared about children, they should want Rind’s findings to be true. Isn’t it preferable for a traumatic event in a child’s life to have no lasting negative effects?
Fixed this.
That was fascinating, thanks! What I got from that, taking into account the criticism described on Wikipedia, is that the study may have been statistically flawed, but the very existence of a sizable sample of non-traumatized individuals is an interesting contrast to the consensus view.
I downloaded the full text from my uni library; would it be ok to link to it here under educational fair use exceptions?
:o
Good catch.
There’s at least two papers by Rind - the original, and a rebuttal to the criticism. There may be more that I’m not aware of. I’m not sure about what you’re allowed to post. Are abstracts fair game?
Exactly. Which is why your second sentence negates your first. What can be rape or molestation may not be experienced as trauma.
I speak from experience.
I don’t think it’s that people can’t believe that it is possible for such a relationship to be non-harmful. I think it’s more a matter of erring on the side of caution.
The potential harm that could be done to a child who has been pushed into a situation they don’t really want and aren’t ready for outweighs the potential harm done by having those kids who are “ready” merely wait a few years to start screwing that 30 year old dude they have their eye on (remember, this thread isn’t about teenagers experimenting with each other, but about adults having relationships with teenagers).
As a matter of biology, teenagers’ brains are still in the process of maturing compared to adult brains (particularly the frontal lobe, the area associated with higher level thinking and judgement). Teens’ ability to make decisions on the same level as an adult is questionable. So basically, by allowing such a relationship to occur, it is us adults making the decision for the kid - it’s the adult in the kid’s life who is deciding, “Well, you seem like you’re ready, so I’m okay with this”. That is not fair to the kid who may grow up to feel like they were taken advantage of and that the adult in their life should have protected them from the situation.
I would also like to note that the sort of cultures where it is considered okay for 12 year old girls to get married usually are cultures where women’s role is to produce babies and the culture doesn’t put a whole lot of value on its women becoming fully self-actualized people.
True, that was poor phrasing. The point was that rape & molestation are not equivalent to sex and are, by any measure, a bad thing regardless of whether it actually affects the victim in any meaningful way. But that could be said about forced hugging or unprovoked spankings, etc. Sex or sexual acts are not inherently traumatic.
Seeing my mom with the worst perm ever placed on the face of the Earth as a small child traumatized me against mindless fashionability. (I thought a witch had entered the house; I didn’t recognize her and hid under a chair.) Certainly she had no intention of this, nor was there any reason to expect such a result, but such is life.
It comical (or insulting, I can’t decide) that sending 18 and 19 year olds to jail and having them registered as sex offenders is considered to be “erring on the side of caution”.
If he/she reciprocated, then he/she was certainly in the wrong, I would say!
Have any 18 or 19 year olds been sent to jail solely for having an age-appropriate relationship (16+, say)? Or do you think an 18 or 19 year old is incapable of sexually abusing a younger child? The most questionable cases I can think of offhand involve redistributing naked or seminaked pictures of underage persons, such as the one mentioned upthread (which is unacceptable under privacy considerations regardless of child pornography issues).
There’s probably more harm coming from the fact that the kid thinks he/she did something wrong. There are groups of people living in other parts of the world whose sexual practices would be considered illegal, deviate, and harmful by our standards. Doesn’t really mess them up by their standards
Can you provide some examples or cites?
Well, here’s one example of a 17 year old going to jail for consensual contact with a 15 year old classmate. I’m sure there’s others. A quick Googling for “18 year old”/“19 year old” and “statutory rape” lists thousands of new articles where charges were filed and teens were arrested, not sure about convictions and sentencing though.
In some cases, while jail time might not be applied the “Sex Offender” tag is used liberally. And the simple fact that they are publicly dragged through the mud in the news by simply being accused is notable.
When I was 14 I lived in a state where that was the legal age of consent. My girlfriend at the time was 15 and we had sex. I thought it was pretty cool. Then I moved to a state where the age of consent was 18 and I suddenly felt so dirty that it drove me into therapy. 
Okay, that didn’t happen, but can you see how nonsensically arbitrary these ages are? My imaginary self didn’t need to leave this country or even Western Civilization.
Depending on the state, “statutory rape” can mean one partner was 19 and one was 16, which is on the borderline of appropriateness in my view, or that one was 19 and one was 13, which is unacceptable. In order to show that many / most of these charges are based on age-appropriate relationships, you’d have to go through them case-by-case, since the terminology doesn’t discriminate. I’m sure someone out there has done this; I’m too lazy to look for cites right now. The point being that I support statutory rape laws in general, and although there certainly have been cases where the laws have been misapplied (same-sex relationships, for example, tend to be held to a much higher standard), I have absolutely no sympathy for the “once they hit puberty they’re fair game” state of mind. I’ve worked with and associated with a fair number of 13-year-olds in my day; most of them are NOT ready for sex, with other 13-year-olds or anyone else.
No cite, but I have an example for this from an intro to anthro class I took once upon a time. Apparently there are cultures in Papua New Guinea(?) where it is believed that a boy cannot produce semen without first having some given to him by an adult male relative. Mode of transmission varies, but try doing that in the US without going to jail.
I’ve heard of this before, and its quoted endlessly as an example of how cultural mores can differ. (“There’s a whole society where…”). I have some scepticism. I wonder if this custom began literally as a lie some pederast told a gullible youth. I know this sounds snarky, but when you read about cases of genuine exploitive abuse, a common occurance is that the abuser tries to promulgate a fantasy/lie where the abuser’s behavior is right and normal.
Good point, this hadn’t occurred to me.
Where did you hear the story? I’d like to know if it has any factual basis, but couldn’t remember enough details to google effectively.