Having children should not be subsidized with tax breaks.
Contraception should be free and available to all.
Citizens who currently qualify to own firearms (no felony criminal record, no mental illness) should be allowed to own full auto small arms.
Gun safety and firearm training should be mandatory in schools.
This is absolutely true and very well-put. God, I remember when I was in high school. I remember the sexual/social dynamics like it was yesterday. I don’t know if it was even so much about these girls’ actual sexual desire for the alpha-male guys (although that certainly played some role) so much as it was the girls’ desire to be known by other girls as the being “with” those guys. The guys were as much trophies to the girls as the girls were trophies to the guys. It was a social game. And the girls could play it as good as anyone.
I did listen to the program from your post, and I learned that my repulsion (being similar to a first response at discovering one’s proximity to a potential disaster) may not be the most effective and realistic way to work on a problem which is harming our children.
I have seen mothers showing a total lack of awareness, (which could have contributed to their children’s vulnerability to predators), so I totally understand the freaking out of a caring parent.
I chose to communicate the reality of this danger to my child; and did so reluctantly, because
I honestly believe that adults who exploit and prey upon our children- should not be in our world.
BUT THEY ARE! And if I just stay in the anger, hate and repulsion stage, I may not see any better way to deal with the problem, short of lining people up and killing them (which would also be wrong) or shipping them off to an island like people with leprosy (another ridicules solution).
And I do better see your point of view Illuminatiprimus, but I hope you can also see mine.
And there is your problem. You are reading what you think is there rather than what is. I have raised two healthy happy children without either chaining them to a bible when they played doctor or playing doctor with them. When the age was deemed apropriate I had the birds and bees talk and I resent your thinking I’m so close minded I cannot listen to actual reason. Read carefully what Lumpy said and his follow up post of adults having sex with children of any age. Children wanting to explore their own sexuality is a far cry from wanting to or thinking it okay to explore it with them.
Go back and read my posts carefully and without your knee jerk glasses. I said those who ACT on their predatory sexual desires and yes it is indeed predatory to have sex with a developing child. Check some textbooks on that one. It damages their psyche and often ruins the ability to have healthy adult sex once they become of age. Until you have spent considerable time with someone damaged in that fashion you cannot appreciate how deeply. Until you have held them in your arms and wept with them you have no idea.
But yes, wishing to kill them is an extreme opinion. Imagine that in an extreme opinion thread. I do think taking them permanently from the children hunting grounds would save some children (and on into adulthood) pain and if I did not have so many I love and feel a responsibility to care for I would be sorely tempted to see how much pain I could take from the future world before I were caught and had to be forgiven by understanding folks like yourself. I kid of course, your understanding is reserved for others.
Yes, high school girls often enjoy sex for various reasons. But are they really actively seeking unprotected sex? I think what is far more common is variations of “If you loved me, you’d do it,” “If you don’t, I’ll tell everyone what a slut you are,” and “If you don’t, I’ll just take it anyway and won’t be as nice.” Yes, often girls give in to the pressure. But who is applying this pressure? I promise you, there is no significant contingent of women actively seeking unprotected sex, and there is a significant number of men who are. It is men who are driving unprotected sex among teenagers.
I’ll grant you that there are young women who are actively seeking to get pregnant and not using contraceptive on purpose. But I think most men in that demographic are actively opposed to the idea of getting a girl pregnant. Those guys would be pretty well advised to wrap it up, because that is a pretty sure way to circumvent that.
In the end, my real objection is that nobody is going to shove anything up my cooter without my express consent. There is a word for violating a person’s sexual organs, and it’s not one that a government should be, no matter how “noble” their purpose. But as long as we are talking about a government that theoretically has the right to commit assault on me and take over control of my basic bodily functions, I don’t see why they can’t do the same for men. Sure, forced female birth control doesn’t seem like that bad of an idea to you…you don’t have to take it. Well, in that case male chastity belts don’t seem like such a bad idea to me- after all, it doesn’t affect me. You don’t see my ability to have kids when I like as important, I don’t see your ability to have sex when you’d like as important. If boys weren’t so hung up on sex, maybe they’d get better grades and stay out of drugs, right?
Of course I agree with this for everyone, but what really got me is the few (I know there were at least two) people here who said it should be done to girls as soon as they start puberty. As the mom of an 11-year-old girl who is nowhere near thinking about having sex (yeah, parents think that and are wrong, blah blah blah…I got pregnant at 17 and I’m not in denial about this), it would be so traumatic and cruel to force her and even younger girls to have an IUD inserted. That’s just sick. I’m hoping the people who said that just weren’t thinking it through and wouldn’t really support such a pointless and traumatic invasion.
Older girls and women can have an IUD inserted and not experience it as a sexual assault because they want it done and it serves a purpose, but some girls entering puberty are still very much little kids and would experience it as a sexual assault no matter what.
Even sven, you do realise that no-one’s talking about violating anyone’s “cooter” when they talk about compulsory contraception?
Whilst I’m not in favour of compulsion, there’s no good reason for a sexually active (with men) woman who doesn’t want to get pregnant not to be on the pill or have the implant.
You’re wrong:
Norplant is not on the market anymore, so that leaves IUDs. Forced on girls at perhaps 9 or 10 years old.
Be educated: Etonogestrel - Wikipedia
For the record, as one of the people who thinks mandatory birth control isn’t necessarily a terrible idea, anything like an IUD IS a terrible idea.
The government should give away heroin. There are a lot of details that I don’t have worked out in my head; you’d have to register somehow, and go through some counseling, and there are some jobs you’d be restricted from doing. But then you could go to a safe place that’s open 24/7 and get a dose to shoot up on the premises. The goal would be to dry up the black market.
That said, I would never legalize marijuana outright because I don’t want corporate America getting hold of it. It should be just illegal enough to keep it slightly underground. Anyone should be able to grow, sell, buy, or possess it in moderate amounts as long as they’re halfway discreet about it.
Pedophilia is always wrong, but we do a disservice to its victims when we lump together the rape of a young child and a “consensual” (not legally, obviously) relationship between an adult and a sexually mature teenager. I’m not saying the latter isn’t wrong, but they’re two different things and should be treated as such.
On that subject, I would do away with the sex offender registry. If we think an offender is likely to do it again, he should stay locked up. If we think he isn’t then the restrictions don’t make sense. (I’m starting a thread related to this.)
Okay, I didn’t know about that one. Still, there is a high rate of discontinuing its use due to intolerable side effects, about 20% I think I read on the product’s web site.
If there was a safe, easy, side effect-free method you could give girls to make them infertile until they were 18, well then, I might not be opposed to giving it to 11-year-olds on a mandatory basis (although I’d still worry about a slippery slope), even if they were unlikely to need it any time soon, much like with the HPV vaccine. But nothing available today is anywhere near that, and it would be an amazing violation.
I’m writing this bit first as I want to address it the most. Okay, I’ve read what you said and I think I owe you an apology. I’m sorry for imputing a position you didn’t actually express, and I took some of the words from your post which stuck out and translated that into something else (which is worse given I accused others doing that to me). So, again, I’m sincerely sorry for that and actually making this discussion more emotive than it needed to be.
I’d make the point that virtually everything I’m saying only applies to those who have sexual feelings for children, not those that attack children, so I think we may be arguing different points. I’m with everyone else in that those that prey (actually prey) on children for their own fulfilment have to be dealt with harshly. It may suck to be in the position of having desires you can’t control and know you shouldn’t act on, but that doesn’t lessen the duty such a person would have to follow the law like everyone else. They have to recognise that even in situations where they may have a child who is expressing a desire to be sexual it’s still taking advantage because the child doesn’t have the full understanding of the consequences of what is happening, and the adult does. I suppose the only difference I would have from most is I don’t feel the need to see these people as monsters necessarily, and judge it on the facts of the situation.
Consider an older man forcibly anally raping a 5 year old boy repeatedly despite the child crying for him to stop? I don’t think anyone can call such a person anything BUT a monster. But what about an older guy teaching a teenager how to masturbate, and getting off on it? Okay, not something I’m going to advocate and again this person has crossed a line that they know exists, but I can’t put them in the same category as the first person even though I still believe they potentially need punishment or possibly help.
There is the sad reality that no amount of help can ever cure someone of their sexual desires for children, it can only ever manage the situation, but I still think that’s better than nothing at all, and better than the situation that they frequently find themselves in now.
That all said, I think there is more to the matter of children wanting to explore sexuality with others who aren’t interested in doing it for their own motivations - do we stick to “can’t ever do it, full stop” or do we again consider the situation and decide what is right for that? I just want to have the freedom to have the debate and conclude for myself it can never be right on a case by case basis rather than taking a position that says it’s never right and the individual situation be damned, because I tend to find that approach doesn’t work with anything.
Again, not advocating adults having sex with children, but just wanting this subject to be treated like any other.
The fact that you said “pretty much” suggests that you’re seeing, as I do, that it’s never completely cut and dried, and that’s all I’m asking for the situation. I don’t think I can even envisage a situation where, judging the situation individually, I find myself concluding “yes this adult/child sexual union looks kosher, they can do it”. But, again, I want to be able to judge the matter according to the facts at hand as I set out above, rather than starting from a position that this whole issue is utterly wrong, QED, and that the people involved need their dicks cutting off (extreme but you see my point).
I think your question on ethical duty as a parent aren’t in quite the right terms - you need to be clear what your own ethical framework is for this, and what I or anyone else thinks isn’t relevant as long as you stay within the law, because there’s no one set ethical framework for parenting. What do I think, in my considered opinion, is the best response? What would I do in that situation? I think I would most very likely to tell such a person that I consider them a risk to the safety of my child and that I feel obligated to take steps to protect my child also (limiting the adult’s access to the child, being particularly vigilant around them). I would at the same time explain to them that I consider their desires to be a danger to themselves and others, and suggest they seek help in managing the situation. Finally I’d express sympathy for the position they’re in of having desires they can’t ever practically act upon, and even some empathy for knowing what that could be like (it wasn’t so long that gays were in the same situation legally). But I’d be clear that this is overridden by my wish to keep my child safe from something that could harm them and that if I think my warnings are not heeded I will involve the police and other relevant authorities, but that would be a last resort.
I absolutely do see your point of view, and I’m able to project myself into the viewpoint of someone who feels very emotional and strong on this issue even though I don’t. I recognise that I’m unusual in that I’m not icked out by this, and so accept that it’s quite useful to have people around me who are so as to remind me that this is not an issue that can be normalised. I think there is also the empathy that I’ve cited up thread that I can have with people who have these desires because, again, not so long ago I was in another class of people who were told their desires were abhorent and it is right that the law prevents them from acting on it. I would have to live in that life, and I can’t help but feel for someone who is consigned to it. But this doesn’t alter that the situations aren’t comparable because, obviously, two adults consenting and an adult and child consenting aren’t equivalent.
I’ve very encouraged that after listening to that podcast you were able to conclude for yourself that your gut reaction wasn’t the most useful one - that is all I’m asking anyone to do. We most likely, in the issue of sexuality and children, always come to the same conclusion that we would through emotion when using reasoning. But I’d STILL rather use reason and come to that conclusion rather than say “it’s just wrong and these people are monsters” and leave it at that. The other point that I’m most interested in is, as you say, it’d be great not to live in a world of people who have these desires but we do, and it’s more important to address that reality in a productive way than just react.
PHEW! I don’t think I’ve had to elucidate on a point before as much as I just have, but I’m glad that I did because I think this topic is one worthy of consideration. Again, sorry to anyone I’ve characterised as having a position they didn’t, and I hope mine is now clear(er).
Except that many men find that it significantly reduces their ability to enjoy sex, in some cases to the extent of impotence - which makes the whole exercise pointless. And handwaving that away as unimportant doesn’t make the problem go away, it just demonstrates a disdain for males. I can just imagine the reaction if there was an insistence on a form of birth control for women that also reduced or eliminated their ability to enjoy it; that would be condemned as a conspiracy against women. But when it’s men, they are told to shut up and stop whining.
Or they’d kill themselves when they started to rot to death from infections due to all the encrusted human waste being ground into their flesh. Or they’d just take out their frustration and rage on the nearest girls.
The insistence on equating birth control and chastity belts demonstrates less of an interest in equality than it does in tormenting boys.
Chemical birth control can and does reduce or eliminate the ability of women to enjoy sex. When I am on it, my sex drive goes to nothing, and I don’t think I’m alone in this. I think that’s where the miscommunication is rooted here: the men see hormonal birth control as “no big deal, just pop a pill or get an implant” and the women see condoms as “no big deal, just wrap your willie” and neither impression is correct.
OK, that’s a reasonable argument. Certainly better than pronouncing that it doesn’t matter if a man can’t enjoy sex as much/at all with condoms, or claiming that every single man who says so is lying.
This is largely why I’m interested in the research I’ve been hearing about long-term reversible BC for men–the methodology I had heard about was (very weirdly) focused on mechanically killing sperm by means of small (and apparently removable injections) into the vas deferens, which should in theory have a much lower incidence of side effects than anything hormonal.
So they’re proposing to essentially turn my wing-dang-doodle into a blender?
I think I can get behind that. 
I must go back. I had no idea that norplant was no longer an option. I’m a middle aged married guy with no kids and no reason to be up on latest methods of birth control. I do not support mandatory iud’s. I had no idea. My apologies.
If someone experiences a complete inability to enjoy sex because of .05mm thickness of latex, I’m comfortable calling that a psychological issue.
And if women are skeered of a little hormone-induced cancer, I am comfortable in calling them cry babies.