# Machetero and Diogenes the Cynic are used cum bags **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 14, 2004, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756 "2004-11-14T20:33:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![GaWd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f08c70/32.png) [@GaWd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GaWd)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2004, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/261 "2004-11-16T21:01:56Z")
> [@Lord Ashtar](#): > > Do you even know what a paradox is? Of course I do. What does that have to do with you making sweeping generalizations, though? > [@](#): > > I know that teenagers have sex. I know that nobody can stop them. I just don’t think it’s wise to tell them that it’s “okay” as in it has no consequences. I assume you don’t do this. If you did or do, I reserve the right to call you a lousy parent, just like I would call Michael Jackson a lousy parent for holding his kid over a balcony (and a host of other reasons). The difference here is that I’d rather have my child have a casual relationship with someone intelligently, rather than under cover of night and ignorantly, guiltily. You, of course, have the right to raise your kids however you see fit. P.S.- nice ad hominem there. Really does your argument justice. :dubious: > [@](#): > > BTW, nice _ad hominem_ there. Thanks for the compliment. > [@](#): > > Really does your argument justice. Actually, it wasn’t an argument. I simply levied my opinion. > [@](#): > > And this is different from other kids…how? I don’t know, why don’t you tell me? By your rationale, telling kids that it’s not a mortal sin to have sex casually will encourage them to fuck anything with a hole in it. Conversely, with your parenting skills, telling them that casual sex is not allright will lead them on into adulthood with a healthy view on sex. Since you seem to think that all teens will act as they see fit anyways, what is the point in even broaching the subject? How will either position help or hinder their development? Please impart upon me your parenting wisdom, oh master. Sam ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2004, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/262 "2004-11-16T21:16:37Z")
**Larry Mudd** “but we grisly old Sykos who have done our unsmiling bit on 'alices, when they were yung and easily freudened” > [@Lord Ashtar](#): > > Let me give you a hypothetical, since you seem unable to understand the nuances of my objection. Take your average, oh let’s say 16 year old. He’s got a girl at school who’s been throwing herself at him, but he’s not sure he’s ready for a full-on sexual relationship yet. You tell him, “While ‘making love’ is better, there’s nothing wrong with casual sex.” Okay, let me give you an actual. I was in highschool. I had girls who wanted me. My father gave me the same advice I suggested. I didn’t fuck anybody until I got to college and found a woman who interested me intelletually. (yes, I started college at age 16, but the point stands) > [@Lord Ashtar](#): > > His eyes light up. You mean he can completely give in to his carnal nature, the consequences be damned? This is great news! So he calls the girl up and fucks her hard. Next thing you know, she ends up being a complete psycho. 16YO decides to break it off with her so he can get back to his football practices or his drama rehersal. She then makes the rest of his high school life a complete hell. But it doesn’t matter, because casual sex is okay. Slippery slope, meet unfounded assertion. Unfounded asssertion, meet slippery slope. Where does “casual sex is okay.” imply “completely give in to all your desires.” Why is not making sex something dirty somehow telling kids to go out and fuck like bunnies? And, simply for the record, emotinally charged ‘serious’ relationships are as likely to go the route of psycho-gal/guy as friends-with-benefits. > [@Lord Ashtar](#): > > Even worse, what if she gets pregnant? Hopefully the boy’s parents explained the real consequences that sex has and the importance of using protection while not demonzing sex-for-pleasure. My mom actually made sure I always had a fresh box of condoms. And I never used them before I was in college. > [@Lord Ashtar](#): > > The kid either gets aborted, given up for adoption, or grows up in a shitty environment since the parents are probably not ready for the responsibility of childrearing. All because you told him that casual sex was okay. Damn… where’s the point where they **eat the baby** all _because man went where God did not mean him to go!!!_ ~sighs~ Maybe, just maybe, sex can be approached in a healthy and sex-positive fashion so that children are both informed and emotionally prepared? Maybe teens can think that casual sex is okay but unprotected sex is bad? Maybe teens can even walk and chew bubblegum? > [@Lord Ashtar](#): > > What if she’s not completely nuts and doesn’t get knocked up, but he decides that he’d rather go have casual sex with someone else? He dumps her, and starts parading around the school with the head cheerleader? Her heart is broken, but still casual sex is okay. A ‘serious’ relationship would prevent this? Hearts get broken. It sucks, but it’s part of the learning process. You can only shield children so long from reality. Instead, why not explain to your kids that casual sex is okay but it often carries a high emotional price and they should be careful? > [@Lord Ashtar](#): > > I don’t think it’s okay for teenagers to have casual sex, simply because 999 times out of 1,000 they aren’t emotionally ready for it. 999/1000? Really? You have a cite to back this up? > [@Dio](#): > > We’re just going to have to agree to disagree on all this, folks. I’m never going to think it’s ok for adults to prey on teenagers. No, I think we can all agree those those who prey on teens are bad. Predatory = not good. We just won’t agree that all such relationships are, by definition and in defiance of facts, predatory. > [@dio](#): > > I’m never going to think that it isn’t sleazy for a 24 year old to bone a 15 year old, I’m never going think that a 15 year old girl is mature enough to make a truly informed decision to sleep with an adult. The very fact that she can’t tell the adult is a sleazeball (especially when we’re talking about more than a few years difference) is ipso facto proof that she doesn’t know what she’s doing. As has already been pointed out, this is circular. And while you may find it sleezy, there’s no “sleeze” meter, and it’s not an objective definition. > [@dio](#): > > You all think there should be moral lines too, don’t you? I think we also agree that the lines are going to have to be somewhat arbitrary. We just disagree on where there lines should be. This has been dealt with too. Moral lines should both be based on general principles and individual cases. > [@dio](#): > > Let’s talk about these oh-so-mature 14 year olds for a second. Some people are trying to argue that 14 year old girl can be capable of making an informed decision about sex and sexual partners. At least you think that’s possible if the guy is 16 or 17. Maybe even 20. But what about if the guy is 40. Why would that matter? Like my father told me when I was learning to swim: “It doesn’t matter how deep the water is, you swim on top.” Likewise, it doesn’t matter how old the partner is, if a girl is mature and a good judge of character, she’ll make a good choice. > [@dio](#): > > Is it ok with you if a 40 year old man tells you that your 14 year old daughter is really, really mature for her age, that he really loves her and that he’d really like to take her up the Hershey Highway. Is that just fine as long as the 14 year old consents? ~blown away~ The maturity level of a fourty year old makes it rather likely that it would be an unequal level. The maturity level of a young 20-something would likely mean that it would be an equal level. And what does it matter if a guy wants to have anal or vaginal sex with your daughter? The sign of morality is now which hole you prefer to put your apendages in? > [@dio](#): > > So what’s the real difference between a 20 year old and a 40 year old? They’re both adults, aren’t they? They’re both accountable for their actions aren’t they? So why is 40 sleazy but not 20? Oh come on! What’s the difference between a 40 year old and a senile 90 year old? I mean, they’re both adults, right? ~sighs~ You are obviously attempting to blur out all facts and individual distinctions. It is a less than cool debating tactic. > [@dio](#): > > If a 14 year old is mature enough to choose to bone a 20 year old, why isn’t she old enough to choose to bone a 50 year old? She is. If a 14 year old is old enough to choose, she’s old enough to choose. That’s what being old enough to choose means. > [@dio](#): > > That’s why I keep talking about an age of accountability. If you are an adult, you follow certain rules. I don’t ask for much. Don’t kill people, don’t steal my shit and don’t fuck children. Children, adult, blah, blah, blah. Let’s stop playing with words now. Some 16 year olds are more mature than some 20 year olds. Does that mean the 20 year olds are not adults anymore? > [@dio](#): > > If you imagine that you’re truly in love with a minor and you won’t seek counselling, then just wait. Wait until the other person actually becomes a consenting adult. **Diogenes** … I kinda like reading your posts in general, but I’m not sure what to say here other than Fuck. You. Minors are sometimes **above the age of consent!**. Yep. That’s right. When I was in New York and made love to a 17 year old, it was legal. So fuck you if you think I needed to go get counseling for having a perfectly legal, perfectly loving relationship. > [@dio](#): > > I said I would make it a misdemeanor if both partners are minors and I’ll stand by that. A minor, by definition, has not reached the age of full accountability yet (so no I wouldn’t lock them up, but I would give them some community service or something). Community service for fucking? Can we follow this through? Honestly, legal punishments for 8 year olds who play doctor? > [@dio](#): > > We also still need an absolute bottom, though. An age for which no mitigation is possible. You don’t like 14? How about 12? How about 9? What’s the magic age at which you would all agree that it becomes predatory and criminal with no gray area? **It is not about a number!** It should be judged on a case by case by case basis. > [@dio](#): > > I’m thinking in terms of what line will do the least harm. There is great potential for harm if teenagers are allowed to make whatever sexual decisions they want and adults are limited only by their own personal consciences. Law =/= morality! You can’t avoid the responsibility to look at cases individually by throwing down puritanical dogma. In many cases ‘adult’ ‘child’ relationships may be wrong, but not in all. That’s the damn point. ---
**Author:** ![GaWd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f08c70/32.png) [@GaWd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GaWd)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2004, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/263 "2004-11-16T21:25:57Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Where does “casual sex is okay.” imply “completely give in to all your desires.” > Why is not making sex something dirty somehow telling kids to go out and fuck like bunnies? [snip] > > Hopefully the boy’s parents explained the real consequences that sex has and the importance of using protection while not demonzing sex-for-pleasure. > My mom actually made sure I always had a fresh box of condoms. > And I never used them before I was in college. [snip] > > Maybe, just maybe, sex can be approached in a healthy and sex-positive fashion so that children are both informed and emotionally prepared? Maybe teens can think that casual sex is okay but unprotected sex is bad? Maybe teens can even walk and chew bubblegum?[snip] > > A ‘serious’ relationship would prevent this? > Hearts get broken. > It sucks, but it’s part of the learning process. > You can only shield children so long from reality. > Instead, why not explain to your kids that casual sex is okay but it often carries a high emotional price and they should be careful? I’m sure I haven’t made my point clear, but this is _exactly_ what I am trying to say. Damn near word for word. I find hiding sex and shaming sex(married or unmarried), horribly harmful to children and our society as a whole. I think it carries with it the exact opposite consequences that they hoped to avoid by approaching sex in that way. THank you for being clear when I could no, **Finn**. Sam ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2004, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/264 "2004-11-16T21:34:07Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > If a 14 year old is old enough to choose, she’s old enough to choose. > That’s what being old enough to choose means. I’m not disagreeing with a lot of the points being made here, but what I want to ask (and what I asked earlier in this thread) was, is the 14-year-old mature enough to deal with the consequences of an unplanned child? Left Hand of Dorkness offered a solution (teach kids to engage in sexual activity that did not risk pregancy) but I believe that you specifically shot his reasoning down. So I’m still asking—if she’s “old enough” to choose sex, is she “old enough” to take care of a baby? Sure, we know that she’ll use condoms, but condoms fail. And yes, we know that she can give the child up for adoption, or have an abortion, but what if she decides that she doesn’t want to do that? And if he’s “old enough” to choose sex, at say, age 14, how is he going to support a child if he gets his girlfriend pregnant? (He may know that he wouldn’t want one and would choose abortion or adoption if the choice were his, but obviously it’s not.) So, are these 14-year-olds really old enough to be responsible for the possible outcome of their choices? ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2004, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/265 "2004-11-16T21:41:22Z")
**Gawd** : ~bows humbly~ I’m flattered. Glad if I did some good. **Yosemite** : I’m wary of making any generalizations. My best guess is that no, most 14 year olds would not be able to handle having a kid. However. There was a time in human history when many many 14 year olds handled it. Our ‘breeding age’ is somewhat arbitrary. Again, I think it would need to be judged on a case-by-case basis, although I would agree that, sans data, my best guess is that most people under, hell, 25, are probably not ready to have kids. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2004, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/266 "2004-11-16T22:02:50Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > **Larry Mudd** “but we grisly old Sykos who have done our unsmiling bit on 'alices, when they were yung and easily freudened” Hah! That’s a spooky thing, right there. ([That’s been a favourite bit of mine for a long time.](http://groups.google.ca/groups?hl=en&lr=&selm=39bedff8.181681036%40news.rct1.bc.wave.home.com) Maybe unfortunate contextually, but there it is.) What’s with all the Joyce nuts in this thread, anyway? ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2004, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/267 "2004-11-16T22:38:34Z")
As long as we’re on Joyce and sexual morality… " But we’re molting superstituettes out of his fulse thortin guts." Also, you ever get a chance to read Joyce’s letters to Nora? Makes hustler look like sesame street, good stuff. I’d link to 'em but they’re not worksafe. (Also provides an interesting window into a relationship which was both loving and sexually-hot) As for all us Joyce nuts, I dunnae know, but I’ll raise a pint of Guinness to ya. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/268 "2004-11-17T00:04:19Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Again, I think it would need to be judged on a case-by-case basis, although I would agree that, sans data, my best guess is that most people under, hell, 25, are probably not ready to have kids. So, if a kid is “ready” to have sex but probably not “ready” to deal with the consequences, are they still “ready” to have sex? What do you think should happen when a 14-year-old becomes pregnant, or gets someone pregnant? Should they be expected to be responsible for the baby? Is that part of what “ready for sex” means—to be able to be responsible for the possible consequences? What do you think the solution should be if, for instance, a 14-year-old gets pregnant (or gets someone else pregnant)? Should they be allowed to keep the baby? Should their parents have a “veto” over them keeping the baby (“We didn’t think you were old enough to have sex or to have a kid, and we don’t want to end up helping you take of your baby”)? Should they be expected to pay for the support of that baby on their own? (The default assumption is that most adults are expected to support their children, after all, so why not for them too? They say that they’re “ready.”) I’m not saying that a 14-year-old can _never_ be ready or responsible. But I think a 16-year-old or 18-year-old is probably more likely to be able to have a job, is farther along in school, drive a car, and while they might not be really “ready” for parenthood, I’d think that the older they are, the more chances that they have of being able to pull it together and at least take a stab at it. But 14-year-olds? Not so much. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/269 "2004-11-17T00:05:35Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > My problem is not so much with teenagers fucking teenagers but with _adults_ fucking teenagers. Then why didn’t you cry rape on that older girl who took your virginity at 17? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/270 "2004-11-17T00:28:09Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > Then why didn’t you cry rape on that older girl who took your virginity at 17? She was only like 4 months older. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/271 "2004-11-17T00:32:07Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > She was only like 4 months older. Was she 18? I hope not for her sake, otherwise she’d have a lot to answer for. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/272 "2004-11-17T00:32:56Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > She was only like 4 months older. More of the “Fine for me, but not for thee” attitude, I see. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/273 "2004-11-17T00:36:01Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > Was she 18? I hope not for her sake, otherwise she’d have a lot to answer for. 😃 I honestly don’t remember. She might have been. Anyway, 18 and 17 is not the same as 24 and 15 which is what I was originally bitching about. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/274 "2004-11-17T00:41:49Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I honestly don’t remember. She might have been. > > Anyway, 18 and 17 is not the same as 24 and 15 which is what I was originally bitching about. You have to understand that you are coming across as an unrelenting hardass when it comes to this issue. If you’re going with “the law is the law. If you can’t do the time don’t do the crime. I feel no sympathy.” you must realize that if you had parents with the same view as you espoused and they walked in on you two and called the cops on her, she theoretically could have been arrested (YMMV, depending on what state you were in) ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/275 "2004-11-17T00:55:06Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > You have to understand that you are coming across as an unrelenting hardass when it comes to this issue. If you’re going with “the law is the law. If you can’t do the time don’t do the crime. I feel no sympathy.” you must realize that if you had parents with the same view as you espoused and they walked in on you two and called the cops on her, she theoretically could have been arrested (YMMV, depending on what state you were in) I think the phrase you’re looking for is “unrelenting dumbass.” **DtC** has gotten his head wrapped around the notion that, somehow, a law made by a body which has huge amounts of scorn deservedly heaped upon it for numerous fuck ups, is actually right, in this case. Nevermind that the law varies considerably from place to place and is sometimes guilty of discrimination (since heterosexual acts can be prosecuted under it, but not homosexual acts, or that females sleeping with underage males is celebrated and not condemned), and that the law is only a relatively recent invention as far as human history goes (you know, considering that for most of our existence the average life expectancy was somewhere around 40), or that it traces it’s roots to a particular mindset which was hellbent on preserving a woman’s virginity, but not a man’s. Don’t think about those things at all, because they’re totally beside the point. Nope, it’s a _law_, therefore _it must be obeyed at all costs._ So, by that logic, those folks who practiced civil disobedience during the Civil Rights Era were totally wrong in what they were doing, since they were violating a law. Nevermind that the law was unjust and immoral, it was the law, and it should be obeyed at all times. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/276 "2004-11-17T01:01:59Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > . I’m never going to think that it isn’t sleazy for a 24 year old to bone a 15 year old, I’m never going think that a 15 year old girl is mature enough to make a truly informed decision to sleep with an adult. The very fact that she can’t tell the adult is a sleazeball (especially when we’re talking about more than a few years difference) is _ipso facto_ proof that she doesn’t know what she’s doing. To sum up : Older guys having sex with younger girls are actually sleazeball preying on unknowing children. How do you know they’re sleazeball? Because they prey on unknowing girls. How do you know the girls are unknowing? Because they’re preyed upon by sleazeballs. The bible is the word of God as proven by the fact it’s written in the bible which is the word of God. > [@](#): > > If you imagine that you’re truly in love with a minor and you won’t seek counselling, then just _wait_. Wait until the other person actually becomes a consenting **adult**. And why people who are truly in love with each other should refrain from having sex, exactly? People who truly love each other aren’t abusing each other, are they? Ah, yes, because they can’t really be in love. Boys are just sleazeballs and girls innocent naive frail things probably abused when they were younger, as proven above. By definition, there’s an abuse going on. Though many will never realize it, even 30 years later. Evidences, direct experiences and testimonies are irrelevant. The Earth is 4 500 years old. Carbon-datings are just erroneous and knowledgeable scientists to be ignored. They’re obviously mistaken since the world is 4500 years old. Also, maybe you should refrain from : -Calling teenagers “children”. They aren’t. -Always mentionning older piggish male abusing innocent younger girls. From time to time, reverse the situation, with older piggish girls abusing innocent younger boys, or older innocent girls abusing younger piggish boys (not sure how you would put it). Many of your posts definitely appear condescendant and misogynistic. “appear”?..well, no…“are”, actually. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/277 "2004-11-17T01:12:23Z")
Nobody answered my question from a few pages back. A couple of Michael Jackson’s victims were 13. If they were consenting should MJ be given a pass? Is it not immoral for a 40 year old man to fuck a 13 year old boy up the ass if the kid really wants it? ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/278 "2004-11-17T01:22:01Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Nobody answered my question from a few pages back. A couple of Michael Jackson’s victims were 13. If they were consenting should MJ be given a pass? Is it not immoral for a 40 year old man to fuck a 13 year old boy up the ass if the kid really wants it? [Bullshit.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5495035&postcount=68) Stop trying to change the subject, now that you’ve gotten yourself backed into a corner. Be a fucking man and admit that you were talking out of your ass when you went off about the guy who boinked a potentially underage kid, and we can all be done with this thread. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/279 "2004-11-17T01:28:16Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > And what does it matter if a guy wants to have anal or vaginal sex with your daughter? The sign of morality is now which hole you prefer to put your apendages in? That would be because a fat and bald 50 yo having anal sex while dressed in leather and chains with a sweet blue-eyed 12 yo innocent girl probably still playing with her barbie dolls makes Diogenes’ point looks better than a 19 yo boy getting a handjob from his beloved 17 yo girlfriend. Both are equally evil in all circumstances, though. Next thing you know, adult male predators pigs will have anal sex with 15 yo underaged dogs, or something. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2004, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756/280 "2004-11-17T01:28:16Z")
> [@Tuckerfan](#): > > [Bullshit.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5495035&postcount=68) Stop trying to change the subject, now that you’ve gotten yourself backed into a corner. Be a fucking man and admit that you were talking out of your ass when you went off about the guy who boinked a potentially underage kid, and we can all be done with this thread. Ok _you_ answered it, sort of. I missed that. So 40 is too old. What should be the cut off age for fucking 13 year old boys up the ass? (And there is at least one poster in this thread who has said that 40 and 14 is not a necessarily a problem) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/machetero-and-diogenes-the-cynic-are-used-cum-bags/274756.md?page=15)