Oh I did read it. Then I read your OP again twice.
Why put the quotes around rape and date rape? Why say it’s a lesser not as harmful rape? Why use your personal event and say it wasn’t a fairytale moment?
No, you really haven’t answered those questions other than with your attitude in the OP.
Well, I have always figured that there are plenty of people who have pedophile-type desires, who never act on them, simply because they are not sociopaths.
For example, I have some strange fetishes, involving watching attractive women in skimpy costumes (superheroines) getting knocked unconscious by various means, but I keep it on “fantasy-level” only. Odd desires do not necessarily lead to criminal-type behavior.
I’m not going to repost what I’ve already posted. read every I’ve made. Carefully. And you’ll discover that your question "Why say it’s a lesser not as harmful rape? " isnt’ a valid one. (Because I would have had to have made that assertion in the first place. Since you are so familiar with the thread you’ll be able to show me the quotes where i say that “it” (which is what, exactly?) is “a lesser not as harmful rape”.
As for my use of quotes and the deep meaning you discern from it… I put quotes around the word “rape” by itself and the term “date rape” as well. Does that mean that I find rape less real than date rape, or the reverse? I also put quotes around the word “date”…does that mean I think dates are realer or less real than rapes? i’m confused…:rolleyes:
Honest to god, you will find SCADS of genuine information in the WORDS I use and the SENTENCES I create with them… even more meaning in the paragraphs! Why, if you look at all of it, you’ll just bubble over with understanding of what I mean.
But if you want to look for something to take offense at by studying my punctuation, well, I guess you can do that too, I’m just not going to waste my time on it.
Just to check, are you describing every 15 year old who has had sex (where the age of consent is 15) a child rape victim?
I’m just jumping in to say, Stoid, don’t have a melt down. Just ignore it when others act as if they haven’t seen your dozens of qualifiers. I have given up on starting certain threads on the dope, because I notice that I get post after post responding to something I haven’t said. You have been crystal clear in your posts. Anyone who still thinks you are speaking to anything other than your own experience is just failing to comprehend clearly worded posts. The fault is not yours. Furthermore, I agree mostly with your OP. We disagree on some of your ideas, but the main gist, I feel you on. I hate the idea of ‘thought police’. If a pedo is keeping his sickness under controll and not hurting anyone, I don’t hate him, and I actually pity his burden.
So, Dio… if a 15 year old boy stops you and your wife on the street, points a gun at you, steals your stuff and shoots your wife in the face… you cool with letting him off the hook with maybe some counseling, seeing as how his little brain is so underdeveloped he can’t possibly be capable of taking any responsibility for what he does?
If the guy is 30 (which was the hypothetical raised in this thread), then yes.
Thank you. I’ve been participating on message boards for almost 25 years, and the disintegration of what once made it great has been heartbreaking: the fact that everyone’s words are right there to see, so no getting bogged down in debates about who said what.
Back in the day (she says as she smokes her corncob pipe and rocks in her rocking chair) when public conversation like this was new, everyone respected the fact that most of the bullshit that occurs in oral discourse was removed: no interrupting, talking over each other, and best of all, none of the “You said X!” No I didn’t! Yes you did!..because it’s all right there!
But as the years have passed, I’ve watched people slowly morph into who they are without the black and white text, playign exactly the same games, same bullshit…while I feel like I’m standing out here frantically shoving the words under people’s noses saying “Hey, wait, it’s right here, remember?” and they look away and act like I’m invisible.
It’s maddening.
Nope. He’s still dangerous. Just because he doesn’t fully comprehend what he’s doing doesn’t mean he’s not dangerous.
And incomplete comprehnsion doesn’t mean no comprehension. Kids that age have not devloped a sense of long term ramifications and consequences, but that doesn’t mean they can’t have functional understandings of the law or “right and wrong.” Nice strawman, though.
You need to look up the meaning of strawman.
Thanks for answering.
I do agree that a legitimate and overdue concern for sexual self-determination and ending coercive sexual practices has unfortunately been blended with a creepy obsession with (especially) child and (also) feminine sexual “innocence and purity” (as if the damage was sex not coercion).
Children over a wide span of years tend, to varying extents, to be sexually active with other people. It is best if those other people are close to their own age.
The wrongness of rape is not contingent on how distraught and emotionally ruined the victim is. Not everyone who survives rape and comes out of it mostly pissed off rather than horrified and shattered is “in denial” about their feelings. (And “needing” for women to be destroyed by it is part of the fetish of purity and innocence). It certainly CAN be that way, as rape is a very personally invasive kind of coercion, but each person reacts and copes in her own way.
You wrote:
It’s not that simple. I am telling you there are men who fucked a child and who we systematically do not send to prison.
Well, obviously not. I was talking about what should be. Obviously the majority of men who sexually exploit teenage girls never suffer any real life consequences, but I wish they would.
Asking if someone who has suffered trauma has seen a therapist is not calling her “crazy”. If that were the case every violent crime victim, in fact ever soldier returning from combat would be “crazy”.
maybe you need to reassess what it means to see a therapist, and why you have a negative stigma about it? maybe Stoid too, because I suspect that she feels the same way about my question, and that is why she lashed out - she thinks the mere question was impugning her reputation, apparently she is more concerned about that aspect of her reputation that her self-professed sluttiness back a that time of the event in question concerns her.
Uh no - the attack is all in your head - and maybe hers too.
It is not my responsibility to get her help. I did suggest as a concerned reader, that her approach to the issue (and others) smacked of someone who might benefit from talking this out with a pro. She and you took umbrage to thatg. Why? If she told us she was living with chronic pain wouldn’t our first words be “have you seen a doctor about it?”
No attack on others because there was no attack on Stoid, although she perceived one and pushed back. then maybe there was a little extra-curricular pushing and shoving as they say on football games, but initially, no.
Apparently I alone am curious as to her underlying motivation for her bizarre opinion, she has started to express it, which I credit her for, but she seems both unwilling and unable to try to go beyond that. Without anything more, I find her attempt to draw generalities for society out of her specific anecdotal experience as a curiosity worth noting, but not persuasive in the least.
Me too. Doesn’t make it so.
Remind me not to hire you to be my spokes person, you just made that nonsense up out of whole cloth. Sort of what you just finished accusing me of doing 
Then maybe you can tell us what she hasn’t (haven’t finished reading the overnight posts yet so maybe she has since then): Whap specific attitudes do you suspect she means, for what specific people, and how will she reconcile it with the law (a profession she has damned nonsensically and at hilarious length in the past)?
In fact, I was tryoing to assess her willingness to speak ratinally, and see failed. I asked her if he had spoken to qualified therapists over the intervening 35 or so years. I asked her for cites and clarifications of her assertins of fact in her OP (not her opinions). No answer was forthcoming for any of that.
Like you (apparently), I value a rational discussion. It is just hat, as usual, there is nothing rational forthcoming from Stoid on one of her threads. Even ignoring the history, there is nothing rational from her here on this thread.
That doesn’t even make sense to me. How would I know about your being raped.
But if a woman Stoid’s age (pretty close to mine btw) came to me personally with essentially the same story (which I hardly think is uncommon), I would think more than a hug and a “there, there” is in order, but I sure wouldn’t support her by saying that she is right, society needs to change, that is all that is wrong and has been wrong lo these many years - it’s society’s fault. :rolleyes:
Actually, you HAVE said that. Your posts are a mixture of opinions, assertions of fact, and conjecture. Me personally, I am holding off my opinion on you overall point until you clarify your assertions of fact, some (most?) of which I find questionable but am wiling to consider your cites should they ever be forthcoming.
Maybe that should be evidence that you are not being as clear, let alone as persuasive as you wish to be?
That is BS. I asked you repeatedly for clarification and you ignored me.
Funny. I said the same thing about your threads, and BigT inferred I hate you. but in reality, it just proves I have been paying attention. 
Not exactly true - what you are discussing is a compromise of law when applied to the statistical distributions of science. Not all brains mature at the same rate - if you mapped “sufficient maturity to understand consent” vs. “age” you would have something more akin to a bell curve - some out on both tails, everyone different from reach other.
That is why I find your view and Stoid’s to be diametrically opposite and extreme. In spite of the evidence, you are willing to assign one extreme option under the law out of all the choices.
Stoid OTOH, seems to be willing to go the other way in the extreme - blame the victim: “she was drunk!” or “she had ‘grass on the field’ so she knew what could happen”.
Bizarre really, both of you.
You said that if a girl gets drunk, that is at least a factor in determining the severity of a rape, perhaps that it is not even a rape at all merely because she was drunk.
Cite?
Cite?
Cite?