Indeed it has, but Rind has addressed those criticisms, IMO convincingly.
um
he obviously went to school (or had other contact with children and adults who looked after them). I am not stupid. But what is distressing is that you exhibit dishonesty by knowing, or at least having good reason to believe, that he had contact with other people, and then saying, or at least implying, that he did not! What the hell happened to your philosophical honor?
No. I said that this is the prediction of my theory, and I explicitly said that if this prediction turns out wrong, my argument will be undermined. However, it seems to me that my prediction was not demonstrably wrong (which is why you’re making those attacks now). It would have been fine for you to admit that you have no evidence against it but that this point was still not decided with certainty. It would have been an accurate judgement, as we do not have the boy with us now. Yet, your policy is to yield no ground.
Excalibur, stop being in denial! Stop fastforwarding to the future so that you can escape the discomfort of dealing with my argument now. Stop maintaining that you do not even have to take part in the debate!
Yes, very roughly, that is my argument. I’ll restate it to do it justice. Extensive research has been conducted which demonstrates that masturbating while watching people have explicit sex does not damage a kid. With this you seem to agree. The only difference between masturbation and sex with a partner are the emotional, personal components. With this you seem to agree as well. Two posts ago, I challenged you to explain in detail what other feeling can result from sex besides love/infatuation/heartbreak. You never answered! Answer me! I assert there are none, but I ask you to try to come up with other emotions too. You are not allowed to just tell me to “stop asserting” and feel that you’ve won! Moreover, I go on to postulate that the discrepancy in research results between solo-sex and partner-sex, a reason for which one is hard-pressed to find in the act itself, is caused by the social effects that enshroud child-adult sex (especially insestuous or homosexual sex, as it often turns out to be) in guilt and shame. Furthermore (and this is actually the more pressing point), children are far more sensitive to feelings of embarassement than are adults, to the point that adults just think they are silly. I remember a few incidents where I would be too afraid of embarassement to walk into a locker room (which was clearly marked with everything but the words MEN) without following a male. I remember being embarassed to the point where I had to go to the other side of the room when my parents would speak with their broken English. I remember I would be so profoundly embarassed by certain comic predicaments on TV that I had to either cover my eyes with a blanket or switch the channel, and it would happen countless times! Watching something on TV! Now, of course, I laugh at those memories (and I wonder if any of you have some to share as well). Yet I shudder to think how profoundly traumatized I would have been if I had to bear the shame of taking part in something that society would deem so much more perverse that being in a lady’s room, or not speaking english well, or being Urkel.
Goddammit, if you don’t have anything intelligent to say, just stfu! I’ve had enough arguing with… no, you are not an idiot (as I can detect your intelligence from other threads)… you are a creationist.
You are the one making the assertion that the only way a child would have ever suffered trauma was if he had been told to be ashamed of his actions. I see no reason to accept your hypothetical without more substance than your desire to have been futtered as a youth.
As for my “dishonesty,” you are simply cherry-picking phrases out of context.
The child was abused (my term). I have never seen any evidence that he had discussed his abuse with anyone prior to various school personnel noting a change in his personality and behavior and seeking intervention. Yes, he went to school and had “contact” with other kids, but having been a kid and having raised kids, I am well aware that kids do not discuss the “shame” of sexual behavior at that age. It is not a subject that comes up. In fact, the presence of such discussion among kids is one of the red flags for adults in schools and social work that abuse has occurred, since it is not a topic of conversation for kids. Contact in the sense that I used it indicated contact with people discussing the shame of sexual behavior, not contact with any human being in any context. Kids his age are liable to giggle and say “Ohh, you said a bad word” if they hear the word “butt.” They are unlikely to say “We find it reprehensible that you would commit fornication with a woman not your wife.”
It is your assertion that children only feel shame or distress if they have been taught that their actions are shameful. I am simply not persuaded.
Regardless what you have to say, please reserve the personal attacks for the Pit.
[ /Moderating ]
Ok, you’ve finally answered one of my challenges. I’d like to post it up, and point attention to it. I understand that you’re saying that we can be ashamed out of instinct (which is not entirely unreasonable, if you consider the pattern of the use of clothes among societies).