As for young people…why draw the line at physical maturity? If physicality is the way we decide who is ready to have sex, shouldn’t younger people at least be able to give blow jobs? What about a young bloomer? I got my period in fourth grade and was an avid masturbator…would it have been okay for my high school principle to start screwing me, assuming I was having fun?
The point is, your arbitrary line is just as arbitrary.
As for wanted and unwanted sexual experiences- I’ve experienced a few unwanted sexual experiences in my life. Some of them were a matter of “Eh, what a bad scene, I guess I learned a lesson.” Others shook me to the core.
Who the hell are you to decide which is which?
In any case, there is one way to make sure you never cause someone to experience a “it shook me to the core” unwanted sexual experience, and that is to never rape anyone. It doesn’t really seem like that odious of a thing to ask.
Wait… are you serious? We all talk about all kinds of things we’ve experienced in our lives in all kinds of contexts… (especially me) Your point appears to be: that I am talking about it publicly is de facto evidence that it screwed me up and I’m in denial about it because if I really were entirely okay 36 years later I would keep it a secret.
And if that is an accurate restating of your position, well, then I am afraid I do not see the logic in your logic.
I’m not, and I’m not suggesting I should be. I’m suggesting that as a culture, we should recognize that the difference exists. We’ve gone from the extreme of completely failing to recognize that real rape can and does occur and and can and does do damage in situations like dating and marriage itself to lumping every imaginable configuration of less-than-ideal sexual encounters into a giant bin and treated them as equally horrible. They aren’t. Not because I say so, but because it’s a fact, as you yourself can attest, evidently.
I think it would be better for everyone if we were more careful about recognizing that it’s not that simple. You can’t blow it all off, and you can’t treat it all like the crime of the century.
Oh, and to try and stop the misrep before it snowballs:
I didn’t.
I didn’t say it should be.
Except that I didn’t draw any lines, and that’s the opposite of my point, which is that the true lines are not fixed and they change depending on many factors.
Tying your bizarre apologetics for pedophiles with your own personal experience of being raped.
No, it is just the long string of non sequitors before the cherry on the cake of your personal experience.
What it really is, but you wll never accept, is that whenever I have noticed threads you start, it is alway prefaced on your experiences persuading you, with no real evidence, that the whole world in general, and entire professions, are worthless and not to be believed.
Why? Because it threatens your own personal view of your world, as though your experience is everyone’s experience, let alone fact.
I notice you didn’t answer my original question: why are you so certain thatg YOU have not suffered trauma, when your symptoms as you write them are not out of line of those who have suffered trauma?
What’s up Stoid?
Keep looking. It’s not the pit, so I will just say your entire persona here seems to be of one who is not really interested in learning from others, but instead imposing your insecurities about you experiences on others, despite common sense of pretty much every one else.
And that kind of thinking is precisely what I meant in my previous message - that is not anything but apologetics, seeking to make sense, in a bizarre way, of your experience.
Which is why I asked if you had shared your experience with competent professionals instead of the internet. It doesn’t make you crazy if you did, it makes you smart. If somebody shot you, would you leave the bullet in you and then say to the internet 36 years later that kids should have guns and if they get hit by bullets, well, they have fingers so they are able to pull triggers so we should just be cool with it? No? Then why make the analogous argument here?
If it were possible to ‘convert’ everyone who still thinks some girls and women are ‘unrapeable’ or can ‘ask for it,’ and get rid of everyone who thinks a man watching his kids at the park is a pedo, that would be great. But something about the OP is probably closer to the latter mindset (the myth that rape and molestation are always the fault of big bad strangers rather than trusted friends and family members).
Yes, and being gang raped by frat boys might be better than being raped with broken bottles by Hutus in Rwanda. Having a relative killed in a car accident could be less traumatic than having them kidnapped and tortured to death. And what of it?
Yes, in the OP lies a very common argument – that treating rape as a scarring, life-changing event for every single victim can be re-traumatizing for some victims, and supports the idea that they have something to feel ashamed about their entire lives, even when they feel they can get over it (or that virginity really is sacred, or that they will always be ‘dirty’). But it’s not as if we’ve reached a point where rape is a rare crime with clear victims and perpetrators. The old stigmas exist, and crimes go unreported. And I don’t think this is because of mass hysteria.
“Impose”? What a very strange choice of words. You have chosen to read my thread. You have chosen to participate. That choice was entirely yours, it certainly was not something I imposed on you.
There are lots of people on this message board that I find utterly lacking in a single redeeming feature of any kind. The chasm in our world views tells me all I need to know and informs my actions - which is to avoid them.
I find it is particularly easy to avoid the threads they start, and strangely enough, I never find myself at all tempted to view the threads they start as an opportunity to share with them my opinion of their personality flaws and psychological defects. Not only because I’m sure they don’t care, but because I don’t either.
The strange choice of words is yours. As you say, it is a “thread”. That means people are going to participate, discussing a topic of your choosing, not ours. It is YOUR words that set the tone, if you don’t want people to comment on them, then don’t post them.
The bigger point is, as you admit, your OP is just another in a long series of similarly structured rants, where your experience casuses you to doubt the colelctive widom of entire well-respected professions.
You never offer any rational evidence or experiments to support your bizarre hypotheses.
Nor have you yet answer my question, instead you attack the people you posted to draw to the “thread” rather than give a single inch and suggest that someone else might have views worthy of having if their experience is not the same as yours.
And that says more about your closed-mindedness than anything I could say. How you got that way, don’t know. But this is a board devoted to fighting ignorance and discussing…if you just want to vent, there are places where you don’t have to subject yourself to the meanderings of others.
Yes, your quirk is to debase and demean entire professions to prop up your internal view of yourself, and to not look closely at what those who might feel otherwise have to say, because it is too painful for you to compromise in the slightest. We saw it in the lawyer thread, and you yourself mentioned some in this thread I wasn’t aware of.
Others have other quirks, but this is your thread as you said. You espoused a bizarre opinion, with a take no prisoners but offer no persuasive evidence approach, and you complain because others call you to task for it.
Nor do I. But I don’t think it helps anything to be extreme on either end.
I’m an enormous fan of balance in all things. I disagree with the idea that shows up with some frequency that in order to undo Extreme A we must embrace Extreme B. I think that just perpetuates extremes, ignorance, and conflict.
A non-sexual example: abortion. My best friend is the excellent mother of two great kids. I’m childless by choice. We are both baby boomers, liberals, and passionately committed to the end of sexism, including a woman’s right to choose.
However my dear friend is so hostile to the possibility of that right being infringed upon that she allows no distinction between a 10 week fetus and a virtually full term baby- as long as it isn’t technically born, abortion should acceptable under any circumstances for any reason. Not because she really doesn’t see that there’s some difference there, (she is a mother after all) but just because of her politics and her fear of the “slippery slope”.
I, on the other hand, reject this and believe it to be counter-productive to the real goal, which is for all conceptions to be intentional and desired. I don’t think that being ruthlessly supportive of any kind of abortion, no matter how vile, promotes the goal, I think it alienates the opposition.
I think it’s better to be honest and seek balance: aborting a 10 week fetus is not the same thing as aborting an 8 1/2 month fetus. So instead of fighting to protect the most extreme in order to ensure the more reasonable, be reasonable to begin with. Recognize a woman’s right and permit abortion, but place reasonable limits.
Same with sex that doesnt’ fall squarely under the heading of “completely consensual between sober, well-informed, mentally healthy and unconflicted adults who have no other relationship of any kind that might create another category of concern altogether” : the possible degrees of difference and severity are real. Being honest about it won’t hurt, and could definitely help.
I just re-read the OP. The topic is clearly what you think about this or that, and so I commented on it. In particular, I wonder what your motive is, even more so now that you have posted that you are magically able to divine when an abortion is appropriate for women and when it isn’t, even when that woman is not you, but yet you seem to have problems distinguishing when sex is appropriate and when it isn’t for some women and girls.
I can’t wait until you tie the two together…14 year old pregnant by teacher’s neighbor, can’t tell anyone her secret until Stoid’s abortion deadline has passed, look’s like she’s gonna be a momma…but she was old enough to understand that when she had sex with that man, right, so what’s the harm?
So, since I asked several times for you to provide some evidence for your views that run counter to entire fields of profession and research, and you have, instead of asking, simply tried to make it about me, how about you, simply answer? Maybe there is a good answer, you seem to be prepared to string together your thoughts on the topic. Can you expound in that direction please?
What evidence is there, with citations, for anything and everything you said and implied in your OP?
I specifically stated that I was not advocating a change in the law. I’m not. It’s about attitudes. And of course we can take each case…we DO. That’s what trials are for! The details count, and the details make a difference, particularly in punishments.
And we absolutely do not need to just dump everyone convicted of any kind of sex crime into the “sex offender for life” bin. There’s some line drawing that needs to be done there for sure.
This is IMHO. I shared my opinion on the topic. You shared your opinion about me. You have made it very clear that you cannot or will not distinguish between the two.
Because I don’t want to continue to battle your desire to tell me what you think of me as a person, which I believe to be entirely legitimate and reasonable on my part, I respectfully decline to continue to have this discussion with you at all.
Cry me a river - read your own OP. It is full of assertions of facts in addition to some opinions. I wonder what the basis is for the assertions, and not is forthcoming because there is none.
That is not about you, it is directly on topic to your OP’s pile of assertions.
No there isn’t. You fuck a child. You go to prison. Its simple. There are no extenuating circumstances. It’s always scummy. No exceptions. There are no “details” that could possibly matter. Our attitudes about the sexual exploitation of teenage girls by adult males needs to become less tolerant, not more so. Save your sympathy for the victims not the criminals.
One point: While a typical 12 or 13 year old girl can become pregnant, it’s a really bad idea, even discounting the psychological angle. A barely-pubescent girl hasn’t yet stopped growing, and her carrying a pregnancy to term would have a huge risk of complications. It might still be worth the risk, if you’re not sure if you’ll make it to 15 before being eaten by a smilodon, but in our modern society, you can’t really say that such a girl is “biologically ready” for sex.
I will say that I find Dio’s opinions on this thread to be as bizarre in another direction as Stoid’s are. His mindset appears to be so closed that he can’t make the effort to find even a single circumstance by which our legal system would keep a man who fucks a child out of prison.
Yet oddly enough, one of the major industries around here involves providing services to just such men, so they clearly exist. Hint: Stoid seems to be of the opinion that young girls can form legal consent, or at least ought to be allowed to. But there are cases where adult men may not be able to form legal consent either for their acts. We don’t put those men in prison.
