The Age Line

[Weird Harold]

Originally posted by StarryEyz:
As the mother of 2 school age boys, ...

One of the things I learned as a scout, was "Never get between a mother bear and her cubs." It seems bears aren't the only mothers with violently protective instincts. <G>

Originally posted by StarryEyz:
What I want is some sort of guide. In some cultures, young people are taught about sex, in depth, by a same sex trusted adult when they near the age of puberty. They get a clue as to what to expect, at least physically and emotionally.

Let your boys know who you trust and who you don't, and then tell them those are people they can talk to about things they're emabarrassed to talk to Mom and Dad about. Most importantly let them know they can talk to Mom and Dad about anything.

Cultures that allow for the embarassment children feel in talking to their parents and have a mechanism in place for dealing with awkward questions are, in many ways, healthier than the repressive 'Puritan' values of today's western societies. (Specifically the US.)

Originally posted by StarryEyz:
So, when we read or write stories about under-age participants, are we condoning pedophilia?

Without the technology to record the author's thoughts and intent as footnotes to the story, we can't know whether it's intended as a guide to the seduction of minors, or a 'report' of what (might have/the author wished had) happened. I'd hate to see Laurel resort to including a disclaimer that 'the acts depicted in this story are not an endorsement of the actions... etc" I find such disclaimers hypocritical in many cases. The author's words and statement of the character's philosophy make a mockery of the disclaimer in many cases.

Originally posted by StarryEyz:
Or is it really only pedophillia if the participants haven't yet reached puberty?

Anyone who has sexual relations of any kind with a pre-pubescent child, should be beaten, strangled, boiled in oil, hanged, drawn and quartered, and then HURT real bad.

That IMHO isn't pedophilia. The word means loving children. Molesting children who are neither physically or emotionally ready for sexual situations isn't an act of love.

Originally posted by StarryEyz:
But if the 15 year old girl next door came to me and asked me an honest question about a detailed sexual situation, and I sat with her and honestly answered her, would that make me a pedophile? In some people's eyes it would, because legally she cannot consider sex yet.

You would no more be molesting such a girl than the teacher taxed with sex education at her school. You're simply less bound by rules and guidlines about answering her questions honestly. If you 'love children' then you would answer her questions. If you didn't love children, you'd leave her to find things out the hard way.

The word Pedohile has aquired some bad connotations, because the legal system uses it to describe the predatory people who prey on children. The word itself does not mean 'one who has sex with children', but 'one who loves children.' Every parent should be a pedophile in it's literal sense.


[This message has been edited by Weird Harold (edited 04-08-2000).]

 

[StarryEyz]

I am new around here, so this might be a little presumptuous of me to open a new post, but, oh well. I've always been a little pushy.

In reading DCL's post regarding beastiality, the topic of pedophilia was brought up. I wanted to know if I am being a hypocrite to say that I feel there are age lines in this subject as well? As the mother of 2 school age boys, I can say without a second thought that if I found out someone was even consistantly fantasizing about my sons sexually,let alone touching them, I'd personally rip thier esophagus from thier throats and gleefully watch the life spill from thier bodies. NOONE hurts my boys! And an 8 year old has no capacity to understand the full ramifications of any sort of intimacy.

But when they are 12 or 13 or so, I fully expect them to be becoming sexual beings, in a more active way. And part of me really hopes they have someone whom they can comfortably talk to about sex and sexual thoughts. I pray it is thier father or me, but in all likelyhood, it won't be. And I pray they don't just take thier peer's word for things and end up as repressed as I was at 20.

So Am I saying that I am hoping for a pedophile in thier lives? No. What I want is some sort of guide. In some cultures, young people are taught about sex, in depth, by a same sex trusted adult when they near the age of puberty. They get a clue as to what to expect, at least physically and emotionally.

So, when we read or write stories about under-age participants, are we condoning pedophilia? Or is it really only pedophillia if the participants haven't yet reached puberty?

Please, because I mentioned having sons, do not think in any manner I want this to turn into something about incest. That is the farthest thing from this topic in my mind.

But if the 15 year old girl next door came to me and asked me an honest question about a detailed sexual situation, and I sat with her and honestly answered her, would that make me a pedophile? In some people's eyes it would, because legally she cannot consider sex yet. But her body is telling her otherwise and having lived through puberty already, couldn't I as an adult have some experience to offer her that may help her through it all?

Just wondering.......

 

[Gil]

Tough questions SE,

Jane 'Rolly' has many interesting perspectives on that. She is also from Hawaii, so may be able to add cultural input.

Alloooooha!

 

[Dickfer]

This is very simple. We all know what's right or wrong and if we say we don't we are full of BS.

Of course anyone messing with an 8 year old should be torn apart! I'd be the one up to doing it anytime anywhere... I think most of the people that come to this site to read or post might think of things but that's not the same as acting on their thoughts.

You can think about the world exploding but as bad as that would be it's nothing in your thoughts...

As for age line I follow the law. If it's legal it's fair game. I've had feelings for girls under age before but keep my rocket in my pants. Do I think there are some girls or boys out there not 18 or of age that could handle sex responsibly? Yes... But I'm not ready to face their dad’s shotgun or bubba in jail over it. And I think it's good to let a girl of about 18 or of age find her own way.

Now this is just my opinion and it's very possible there are better ones out there so don't flame

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Your topic StarryEyz made me think of my own experience, and I asked myself, "When was I ready?"

I first started buying Penthouse at age 14, and even then I knew the Forum letters were bullshit and the girls were airbrushed. I was wholly inexperienced, but mature enough to separate fantasy from reality, and looking at and reading (mainstream) porn didn't warp me in the slightest. So, at 14 I was certainly ready to discuss and ask serious adult questions about sex, but, no, I wasn't ready to have sex.

At 15 I was much more comfortable with my body, and could have handled it physically, though emotionally I was still growing.

At 16 I first had sex, and it was a breeze. My mind and body were ready for the act of love (if not for love itself).

But society recognizes that not everyone is "ready" at 16, and not all can make competent decisions about sex, and that's why we have laws -- to protect those too young and too immature to have an equal decision in the engagement of intercourse.

No one will ever be happy with a set age for sex, because it's too subjective. Unfortunately, the law can't be subjective, it has to be the same law for all, and I'm fine with 16 and 17 being legally "too young", even though there are plenty of kids out there who, like me, find themselves "ready" before the courts do.

[This message has been edited by Dixon Carter Lee (edited 04-08-2000).]

 

[Dickfer]

Dixon Carter Lee... Great post! I also think there might be some people ready to handle sex before legal age but there's still the law.

 

[Hans]

I wish I'd seen this topic earlier. This response is to the original post by StarryEyz.

Where should I begin. First of all your answering a question about sex from a 15 year old girl in now way shape or form even remotely makes you a pedophile. A pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children. You're not and a 15 year old isn't a child anyway, except of course in the eye's of the law.

Which state is it that you live in that a 15 year old cannot legally have sex? In most states statutory rape laws don't include people who are of similar ages. I know because I've looked at some of them. The one for Arizona specifically states that it is sufficient defense for the older person to be within 3 three years of age of the younger one if the younger one is 13 years of age or older. I don't know what the laws are like in every state, but I can't imagine there are many prosecutions of people under the age of 18 for having sex. Say you've got two 16 year olds who are dating. Well if you're going to charge one, you've got to charge the other. The laws are gender neutral.

My personal opinion is that adulthood begins when a person reaches puberty. Our culture is somewhat off kilter in that it doesn't recognize that the differences between an adolescent and a child are greater than the differences between an adolescent and a mature adult. It wants to ignore those differences or minimize them. In many cultures a person is considered and adult, at least symbolically, when they reach puberty.

As far as sex goes, puberty is the time when human beings become sexual. This is the time when we start thinking more about sex, desiring sex, and having sex. Not everyone has sex when they are 12 or 13, but it is not unheard of. By the time a person is nearing 18, they most likely have had sex. This is perfectly normal and not some "problem" our society needs to solve. This is the way its been for tens of thousands of years at least. My grandmother got married when she was 16, an age when some people nowadays would go into hysterics at even the idea of her having sex.

I don't think that having sexual feelings and even fantasies about a teenage person is abnormal or makes you a pedophile. Most of us (at least in my generation) first had sex when we were a teenager with another teenager. So why would we now be turned off by the idea of having sex with a teenager? Even if you don't agree with the idea that teenagers are young adults, you do have to admit that at least physically a 16 or 17 year old girl is mature. Why would someone my age not notice a pretty 16 or 17 year old? I don't think this makes me a pedophile, I think this makes me normal. I haven't had sex with an "underage" girl since I was 19, and I wouldn't do so today. Not because I think it would be morally wrong, but because I'd rather not go to jail and also because I look for more than sex from a relationship. A 16 or 17 year old might be fun in bed, but she and I aren't likely to be on the same level emotionally, so whats the point?

Sex is such a messed up issue in our society, mostly due to religion. Every society with a strong religious presence has some issue that they go nutty over. In our case it was sex, in other cultures it is something else. But ultimately it is not religion that does this. It is human nature itself.

As for your sons, I'm glad that you aren't afraid of them becoming sexual beings. My generation could have used more parents like you.

Hans

 

[Weird Harold]

Well said, Hans! Bravo! <stands and applauds>

 

[Dickfer]

Whatever... Call a wolf fuzzy wuzzy and it will still eat your ass. We all know what a pedophile is. Oh yes... I love kids. Come let me give you a big hug. Nevermind that thing poking you from my pants. WHATEVER!
If a time comes when I have a kid I don't need a child lover loving my kid and if they do I'll have a surprise for them!

Originally posted by Weird Harold:
You would no more be molesting such a girl than the teacher taxed with sex education at her school. You're simply less bound by rules and guidlines about answering her questions honestly. If you 'love children' then you would answer her questions. If you didn't love children, you'd leave her to find things out the hard way.

The word Pedohile has aquired some bad connotations, because the legal system uses it to describe the predatory people who prey on children. The word itself does not mean 'one who has sex with children', but 'one who loves children.' Every parent should be a pedophile in it's literal sense.


[This message has been edited by Weird Harold (edited 04-08-2000).]

 

[Rachel Picabia]

Fuckit! I can't believe I just did that. I've just spent half an hour writing a rant and then pressed the CLEAR FIELDS button instead of SUBMIT REPLY.

Oh, well. Here's the gist of what I was saying:

Eeyore. Sorry, I mean HAROLD: This 'the real meaning of the word' stuff you keep spouting is just semantics. You must realise what most people (barring Latin professors) are going to think when you say the word 'peadophile'. They're not going to think you're incredibly clever for knowing the real derivation of the word. They're more likely to wonder why you're trying to defend peadophilia. You can try this theory out if you like. Walk into your local police station and say, 'I'm a peadophile. I'm fond of children'. See how long your lecture on lexicography lasts then, dear.

There you go. A short one-paragraph long rant for your files, Harold.

NOW, LISTEN EVERYBODY!!!!!!

Sorry for shouting. I just wanted to clear something up. Is the law in America that you can't have sex till 18? In Britain it's 16, which I think is a fair-enough legal cut-off point.

Sorry, for the interruption

rachel
xox

 

[StarryEyz]

Originally posted by rachel picabia:
Is the law in America that you can't have sex till 18? In Britain it's 16, which I think is a fair-enough legal cut-off point.

I have lived in 10 different states, and aswas stated before, laws differ from state to state. But, the general guide is 18 and under is legally jailbait.

I agree we have to be the ones protecting our kids (around the world) with laws to give them some power against those who would hurt them. But in that action, we have allowed right-wing conservatives to basically ban ALL sex education from classrooms; ban any responsible party a youth might have for gathering information from being alone with them; allowed our children/youth to be bombarded by mixed messages; ect...

On the one hand, we give them the message that they should be sexy. Models, movies, books. And on the other hand we tell them "Don't talk about sex openly. Don't ask questions. You're too young" (In this, I am thinking of youth in thier teens, not children.) So we encourage them to sneak any information gathering they may need to do. So we encourage youth to be secretive in thier sexual thoughts, which, let's not kid ourselves, teens have. So we are opening them up to abuses by some of those "really sick mother fuckers" (ala Dennis Miller) but making them be closed and ashamed of thier perfectly normal thoughts.

But if I were to stand on a public soapbox and start saying "Lets have some open forums on sexuality. Lets get a dialog going with no judgement. Lets open our doors and hearts and ears to the future of this world and help them become better, stronger beings because we are willing to accept them.", well, I'd pretty uch be looking at my last day of freedom. I'd be arrested on the basis that I was promoting pedophilia in the adults who took part in this "discussion". And they'd probably all be arrested too.

And this is based on the assumption that we are dealing with all honest adults with no harmful intentions.

I just feel this culture/society is too fucking repressed!!! But I was your classic Catholic schoolgirl for most of my life, so I'm dealing with stored anger on SO MANY levels.

 

[Dickfer]

Thanks Rachel... You made the point I was trying to. A woman's touch is always great!

 

[Weird Harold]

Originally posted by rachel picabia:
I've just spent half an hour writing a rant and then pressed the CLEAR FIELDS button instead of SUBMIT REPLY.

Compose your rants in your word processer and cut and paste into the message form. saves a lot of heartache.

Originally posted by rachel picabia:
This 'the real meaning of the word' stuff you keep spouting is just semantics.

Exactly. It's semantics. Unfortunately, I don't know a 'safe' term for someone who loves children as they should be loved. The point I've been trying to make, is that the laws are in place to protect children for being expoited by predators. The reperessive elements and vocal minorities use those laws against people who give children information they need to survive in life. It has gotten to the point where paranoia about the predatory types makes it nearly impossible for a child to be a child. They have to be kept in mommy's line of sight before she feels they're safe.

Even parents are secure in their children's ability to avoid predatory strangers, wouldn't give they're children the kind of freedom that I enjoyed in the 50's.

Originally posted by rachel picabia:
Walk into your local police station and say, 'I'm a peadophile.

Rachel darlin', I'm Weird, -- not stupid. <G>




[This message has been edited by Weird Harold (edited 04-08-2000).]

 

[Lajo]

A lot of verbose answers. My opinion is this...while I might fantasize with a young woman (has hit puberty and is 14-17), I won't do it. It's illegal. "Nuff said.

But...if that some person (male or female) comes to me with an honest question about sex, I will do my best to tell them the truth. It was probably hard enough for them to ask in the first place. Under say 12 or 13, I would likely slide past an answer and tell them to talk to their parent(s). I am not sure they would be mature enough to understand the answer or concept.

 

[StarryEyz]

Originally posted by Lajo:
Under say 12 or 13, I would likely slide past an answer and tell them to talk to their parent(s). I am not sure they would be mature enough to understand the answer or concept.

Thank you. See? You are the type of person I am hoping to have around when my boys get old enough to need someone.

 

[MADDOG]

OK, Here's a question. (Hope it's not too philosophical. Hope I spelt Philosophical right!)

As in the UK, the legal age of consent in Australia is 16. Is it then wrong for an American to travel to Oz (for a holiday) and end up having relations with a 16 year old? It's perfectly legal, and to an Australian, it may not be immoral, but what about to someone whose cultures own laws with regards to legal age differ from mine?

Cheers,
MADDOG

 

[Weird Harold]

Having traveled to several overseas assignments in 21 years with the USAF, I can tell you that part of the newcomers briefings at each new assignment included the age of consent laws. Part of that briefing was always the warning that Airforce regulations (also 16) applied where the Airforce had jurisdiction. essentially that meant no matter the age of consent off base, as long as you brought the girl on base, 16 was fine.

In a realistic sense however, the offbase age always applied if it was older, and the USAF regs applied if it was lower. That's a little different than what you asked though. I think Slut_Boy might be better qualified to give an expert opinion, but As I understood the briefings, legally, whoever has jurisdiction where the act occurred is the laws that govern the legality.

 

[MADDOG]

Hey that's interesting. I find it strange that United States law sets the Legal Age at 18 (That's right isn't it?), but the United States Airforce (And the rest of the military I guess?) gets 2 years taken off the age of consent. I wonder why that is?

MADDOG

 

[Rachel Picabia]

Thanx, Dickfer. I love you, too. (I'm being extra nice, 'cause I had a bit of a go at you in one of the other strands, just now.)

The reason I think 16 is a good legal cut-off point, is 'cause in general most girls and boys (or should I say 'young women' and 'young men') have passed through puberty and are at least PHYSICALLY mature. I know of girls that didn't start having their period until 19 or 20 - but usually by 16, you've been through all that. I realise that the laws also take emotional and mental maturity into consideration. Some girls have their heads screwed on right by 16. Some are still kind of immature - they may make rash decisions that could affect them for their whole lives (getting pregnant etc). You could say the same of 18 year olds or 20 year olds. (I'm 31 and I STILL find it hard to think of myself as a responsible adult.) I don't know a way around this. But I think that, in general, people have become adults by 16.

Obviously, laws aren't going to change in America. No party's going to be elected if they say they're going to reduce the age of consent. 18 is kind of set in stone now. But if that means that an 'adult' can't give a 'child' realistic information about sex and sexuality until they are 18, then you're in danger of producing some confused, misinformed, and possibly even slightly fucked-up adults.

love
rachel
xox

ps - did I mention we can go into a pub and have a beer at 18 here, too? Can't watch hard-core porn though. I mean EVER. Ah, well - you win some you lose some.

 

[Slut_boy]

Its funny that governments very often set their 'legal age' limits in such a way as to suit their need. You basically become old enough and therefore 'legal' in the eyes of the law in a very flexible and plasticine type way - let me use SA as an example:

At 18 you are old enough to drive a car and have a drink in a pub. You are also old enough to vote in an election. But in times of war, 16 year old boys become old to go to the army and kill the enemies of the government.

The irony of course is that you are old enough to kill before you are old enough to vote. I still can't see the constitutional logic in forcing allegiance to a government that you don't have a right to out-vote.

 

[Weird Harold]

Originally posted by MADDOG:
Hey that's interesting. I find it strange that United States law sets the Legal Age at 18 ...

The jurisdictional issue gets complicated sometimes here in the US. I think the federal law is the same as the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), But the individual State laws take precedent. The states vary, with some allowing marriage at age 12 with parental consent, others anything goes at age 14, and some may still even have the double standard Oregon had when I was growing up. It used to be that A girl became a legal adult at age 18, while a boy wasn't a legal adult until age 21. (Age of consent, able to sign binding contracts, etc.) I'm pretty sure that got changed when the whole nation changed to a legal drinking age of 18 for a few years before backtracking thanks to the efforts of MADD.

We also have wonderfully sane laws like the Mann Act, (circa 1930's), which makes it illegal to 'transport a woman across state lines for immoral purposes.' So that means I can take a 17 year old to Australia (or some state where she's legal) and screw her brains out and they can't prosecute me for having sex. They can however lock me up for taking her there.

 

[Dickfer]

I don't know where you have been but the youngest anyone can be in any state with any permission is 16. If you can prove me wrong then I'll stand corrected. About the law having to do with taking people out of state. That's to keep perverts from getting around the law to do their dirty deeds.

The more you post on this subject the more you seem like a pedo to me... Sorry but this is how it looks to me... Just say yes it's wrong to mess with kids and leave it at that!

Originally posted by Weird Harold:
The jurisdictional issue gets complicated sometimes here in the US. I think the federal law is the same as the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), But the individual State laws take precedent. The states vary, with some allowing marriage at age 12 with parental consent, others anything goes at age 14, and some may still even have the double standard Oregon had when I was growing up. It used to be that A girl became a legal adult at age 18, while a boy wasn't a legal adult until age 21. (Age of consent, able to sign binding contracts, etc.) I'm pretty sure that got changed when the whole nation changed to a legal drinking age of 18 for a few years before backtracking thanks to the efforts of MADD.

We also have wonderfully sane laws like the Mann Act, (circa 1930's), which makes it illegal to 'transport a woman across state lines for immoral purposes.' So that means I can take a 17 year old to Australia (or some state where she's legal) and screw her brains out and they can't prosecute me for having sex. They can however lock me up for taking her there.

 

[Lajo]

Thank you starry! And I could say the same for you as it appears we share the same opinion in this regard?