Compiling that sort of “documentation” is likely to land your ass in jail.
There is no objective source of morality that straight-out says that killing other humans is wrong, but we have generally agreed that killing people is wrong, at least in civilized countries where we have ended violence of tribalism. Humanity thrives in stability.
Slavery ended because 1) moral outrage and 2) because of the Dominican Republic uprising. After the industrial revolution, marrying underage citizens was banned in most countries because exploiting people is wrong (imagine if somebody exploited you!). Understanding that the pendulum of power swings drove societies to codify non-aggression and non-exploitation in law to prevent future unrest.
Me, I’m playing through life as a paragon. Because I want to make the world a better place - a safer place. A non-aggressive society is a society in which art and science thrives.
- I’d love to see some cites for this, as @strokeybeard has already requested. Because for all the animals similar enough to be humans to be worth comparing, the norm us the exact opposite.
Furthermore, this plays into the whole “they asked for it/they’re very sexual youngsters” BS. Kids will sometimes push the boundaries on “good touch/bad touch” just to learn where those boundaries are. That does NOT mean they’re asking for it.
- Older kids/teens can easily get pushed into situations they’re not comfortable with – and I’m speaking here as someone who could pass for 25 by the time she was 15. Sometimes people think the physical maturity matches the maturity of sexual desire. They’re wrong.
Also, you made out that “victimhood” is something conferred by societal norms, not abusers. It’s the other way 'round.
That’s great that you, an adult, don’t want protecting – I’m sure those who want to deregulate the FDA will find that heartening.
As a former 15 year old girl who had to deal with more than her shares of shit from older men, I say there’s nowhere near enough protection yet.
And don’t you dare go relativistic on me, because you have NEVER been a 15 year old girl. You have no authority on this subject, but I do, because I’ve lived it.
Popo, I get the feeling you’ve been reading some Foucault as of late; and if so some of his examples of power dynamics on the individual level excluded from societal norms fits with what you are saying. What is missing from that is the rest of the whole book, that is the whole point. Here, let me quote the man himself on childhood sexuality:
Michel Foucault Sexual Morality and the Law (1978)
In closely related news, Emmanuel Macron is now the front-runner for the French presidency.
That lack of discipline and deliberation that you saw in other kids is exactly the problem.
Any reasonable adults would have seen a bit of that childishness in you too even if you were working harder to be more mature. You were still growing and developing.
Adults that aren’t turned off by that immaturity are by definition not looking for an equal relationship. They are attracted to that lack of maturity and lack of fully developed autonomy.
Kids need to mature into mature relationships. It does take a different amount of time for each person but no teens are really ready to be adults. Many in their 20’s are still pretty underdeveloped. Adolescence ends physically in the mid 20’s.
I have known lots of guys who go for underage girls and there was always a lack a respect. I had an older makeout buddy when I was 15, he was 25. It was not an egalitarian relationship, and if I had not been careful and called things off when I did it would have gotten out of hand. He did not respect me as a decision maker even though I was pretty obviously more intelligent even at that age. I could see him trying to push me into situations that I was very clear I was not ok with. He would not respect my wishes and just changed tactic. A more impressionable girl would not have know how to get away from someone like that. And a more clever predator would have easily gotten around my fledgling defenses.
I was very clear and vocal about my personal boundaries, just to reiterate, this was not unclear implied signaling.
It is normal for kids to sometimes find older people attractive. Adults who finds teens attractive are incapable of or avoidant of egalitarian relationships.
Thank you for your calm, rational input; you just totally pre-empted a really malicious comment that was just hovering at my fingertips.
Your comments here are genuinely creepy, no matter how ‘benign’ your intent allegedly is; your blase ideas about prepubescent sexuality are making me uncomfortable, and it’s not because I’m “insecure or projecting.”
We could have a serious discussion on expanding the rights of children and I personally feel like they need to be greatly expanded. Voting age, religious freedom, privacy, and yes, sexual freedom.
But talking about the “right” of a 15 year old to sleep with 30 year olds is an extremely terrible jumping off point.
You really don’t listen, do you? Not all of us got that “protective treatment”, and not having it SUCKED. We are TELLING you, from personal experience, that this is a bad bad bad thing. And you make snitty comments about flying crockery.
This isn’t even sea lioning. It’s just willfully saying creepy things in an effort to be radder than thou.
Congratulations, you’ve made the whole thread about you by being a repulsive creep, and doubly repulsive for claiming anyone who doesn’t agree with you is repressed and damaged.
That’s what abusers do to their victims, by the way. I’m starting to seriously wonder if maybe you know that and are advocating for a world where it’s easier for abusers to do that.
Nothing “straitjacket”-y about it.
I wouldn’t say that. There are sociopaths who use morality to bludgeon others. And I reject morality but am not (IMO & FWIW) a sociopath.
Sociopaths reject ethics.
I have no doubt popo’s implied upbringing was none too good for the psyche; however, popo comes of as a shitty Milo clone or that 13 in class who insists that square mustache man did no wrong.
FWIW, the commonly used definition of a sociopath is: somebody who feels no empathy, someone who harms and manipulates others.
But maybe I’m just dog piling. Or maybe they’re just so gosh darn wrong and people can’t restrain themselves from posting a response.
My close friend suffered childhood sexual abuse. But my friend also has done everything to become a moral and just person rather than to perpetuate the grave crimes and injustices. It is in the capability of every individual to choose the way of righteousness; there are many schools of philosophy, ethics, and religion that will help guide them.
Here I was thinking you have giant balls of steel to question this particular eternal verity, but what, you’re actually surprised that some folks aren’t prepared to be all detached and intellectual about it?
This is as hot-button as hot-button issues get - it takes balls of steel to even just like one or two of your comments on the subject. Reasonable folks lose their shit on this one.
I agree that in principle, there’s value in questioning every assumption, and I know people are putting words in your mouth and distorting your position, but nonetheless I’m gonna have to distance myself from it a bit.
Sure, the notion that 17 years and 364 days is too young under any circumstances doesn’t go back all that far, and may well not last many centuries unmodified, but if you look at how universal and deeply held the emotive dogma is around it, it’s obvious the price of questioning it is prohibitive.
No good is likely to come of this.
BTW, what’s the [LNN] in the thread title mean?
Lounge News Network. In the pre-category days, it was a way for distinguishing news articles (with a snarky tone) from other content.
That’s a fawning way to say “hey, nice post supporting adults fucking goddamn children.” You may want to rethink your policy of blindly supporting the popo before you wind up supporting violence against minorities. #BlueNamesMatter
Socialists were often between a rock and hard space, since fledgling socialist state were unfairly accused of things like babu eating. Blindly defending the Soviet union was a bad idea, though their knee jerk response was understandable.
See what I mean, Popo?
Look at this fucken shit.
Polite benefit of the doubt? Pff, he said something I can misconstrue as excusing kiddy fiddling. Pitchfork sharpened, torch lit.
Tino, pull your head in, dude. One thing I am fucking never, is fawning.
It seems we have very few true SF fans here after all; I don’t see anyone who’s taken ‘all laws are local’ to heart.
I went against my better judgement to say anything here… I can see it now: three dozen posts required to clarify my position on the matter, dammit
And now, in a shocking turn of events, the very moderators of /r/3dshacks who approved the original article have deleted it with the excuse of not wanting to put people off 3ds modding. You can’t make this shit up!
This shit’s fucken radioactive.