paedophile forum

[dopediana]

my semi-psycho friend becky linked me to this site so i could get a laugh.
http://www.boybliss.net
go to the forums. these people are freaking NUTS........

[The Feral Underclass]

I was refused access....Damn!!!

[Danton]

What is wrong with you people?

[RedAnarchist]

That doesnt look too nice at all.

If it is a paedo forum for real, tell the police. Paedophiles are sick, sick individuals.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 05:09 PM
What is wrong with you people?
lighten up Himmler!!

[toastedmonkey]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 27 2004, 05:12 PM
lighten up Himmler!!
do you suggest we take a light hearted approach to peadophillia?

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Just because you're a peadophile doesn't mean that you have sex with children.

We're not going to prohibit folks from liking or not liking young buys, are we?

As long as they don't actually act upon their thoughts.

[Wenty]

i didn't go but i don't want to for fear of arrest!

Its a sad world we live in.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by toastedmonkey+May 27 2004, 09:57 PM--> (toastedmonkey @ May 27 2004, 09:57 PM)
The Anarchist [email protected] 27 2004, 05:12 PM
lighten up Himmler!!
do you suggest we take a light hearted approach to peadophillia? [/b]
Absolutly not..

[BuyOurEverything]

Stupid moralists. As long as no one is physically harmed, nothing's wrong with fucking little boys!

[The Feral Underclass]

Depends how little...It may be very easy to penetrate a 6 year old boys mouth without hurting them...doesnt mean its right though.

I think when children are able to say that they DO NOT want to have sex, then it is ok. Regardless of age.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Not to be jugemental, but in defense on Di's remarks, the folks on that site are pretty strange...
Take a good look, and you'll see loads of stuff on how pre-pubescent booys are meant to be sexually active and other such things. All with the conotation that there is a severe problem with the age at which people are expected to become sexually active in our society.

[BuyOurEverything]

In all probability, that is true, I didn't read any of the posts. I was just commenting on sex with kids in general.

TAT, I'm not sure one could safely have sex with a 6 year old, but perhaps it's not a great idea. I was refering more to 11-13 year olds. Sex with younger kids, however, is not the ghastly act it's made out to be.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

More often that not it's rape.

I don't want to seem morally conservative and intolerant of other peoples' choices, but I'm very reluctant to allow people to have sex with minors, not because I simply want to restrict an act that I may find offensive(which I don't, really), but because children can easily be coerced into doing things that they don't really want to do. And it may sound authoritarian, but young enough children cannot be trusted to decide whether or not they dicks in them.

Sexually aroused pedophiles, as any sexually aroused adult, is very likely to be forceful in their pursuit of sex. And children are a very easily bullied target.

And I understand that exactly why people want to have sex is really nobody's business, but what pleasure would a pre-pubescent boy have ion sexual intercourse. All signs point to the possibility that the kids are being coerced into such acts.

Perhaps after the age of 10 or 12,even though they're still technically 'pre-pubescent', sex is understandable. The age of the other partner obviously doesn't matter.

[Individual]

Perhaps after the age of 10 or 12,even though they're still technically 'pre-pubescent', sex is understandable. The age of the other partner obviously doesn't matter

I'm still waiting for my sarcasm asterik RedZeppelin. Don't let me down here...

[Hate Is Art]

Peaodphillia is a mental illness in some respects so in anyway we judge them we have to remember that, I won't even click that link for fear of what is on it though!

[DaCuBaN]

I won't even click that link for fear of what is on it though!

Yeah, of all the things I could get done for I'd rather not be falsely accused of paedophilia thank you very much :lol:

Not to mention I don't think my work would really approve ;) :D

[Hate Is Art]

hehe yeah! God Knows what you lot were thinking clicking alink to a Peadophilia website!

[Saint-Just]

These people are beyond the bounds of thinking. They are talking about their thoughts and writing about them. I think that for the safety of children these people should be locked up. I think that people with children living near these people and of course those related to these people are at risk of having their children sexually abused.

Little boys and girls have emotions like any other human being, if someone has sex with them they are going be badly hurt, mentally. People express love through sex and as so it will become difficult to have sex and express love correctly if someone rapes them whilst they are young.

[antieverything]

I really can't believe that some of you think it is possible to have sex with a young child (even if they don't resist) and not severly harm them psychologically, especially later in life!

[RedAnarchist]

People who think its ok to have sex with children are disgusting. How on earth does a child consent to a sexual act when they know nothing about their sexual organs or of sex itself?

[Kurai Tsuki]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 09:41 PM
Stupid moralists. As long as no one is physically harmed, nothing's wrong with fucking little boys!

That is undoubtably the most immoral thing I have ever read in this forum. I would only hope that you never find a lady who will consent to have children with you.

[BuyOurEverything]

The fact that many people here cannot distinguish between consentual and non-consentual sex is, frankly, quite disturbing. It's also kinda of pathetic how so called leftists all of a sudden turn into the Christian Coalition as soon as the people are under 18.

That site does not contain pornography or anything of that sort, simply a bunch of strange old guys talking about the beauty of children with pictures of children in their avatar.


That is undoubtably the most immoral thing I have ever read in this forum. I would only hope that you never find a lady who will consent to have children with you.

If you're refering to Judeo-Christian 'immorality,' you can preach that shit elsewhere. And thanks, I hope I never have kids either.

[Kurai Tsuki]

I definately would not preach a "Judeo-Christian," form of morality, that would only promote pedophelia. How many people know about Noah being said to become, "drunk and naked," in front of his children? If that's how the christian prophets behave, I can't imagine what its most fanatical followers must think.

[Anarchist Freedom]

that is fuckin hilarious and wrong at the same time.


check out the nambla website its pretty sick man

[antieverything]

Consentual pedophilia? What a sick joke!

Let's do a bit of roleplaying, shall we?

Me: Hey there, BuyOurEverything, you are a very pretty boy.
BOE: Thanks mister.
Me: Want some candy?
BOE: sure...thanks!
Me: I'll see you around.

*later*

Me: So, I have more candy back at my place, wanna come and play some video games?
BOE: Gee whiz, mister, sounds like fun!
Me: Doesn't it?

You know, BOE, I love you...do you love me? If you love me I'll give you candy!
BOE: Um, yeah, I love you.
Me: You know what grown ups do when the love each other don't you? No? Well, wanna play a game?

...and I think you can imagine how it ends.

Like someone else said before, you can't have consentual sex when you don't know what sex is or what sex organs do. You also can't consent to something when you are a child being manipulated by a pervert!

[Urban Rubble]

Thank you for being the voice of reason, once again, antieverything. You're quickly becoming one of my favorite people on here/

Jesus Christ people, I'm not even going to get too deep into this (again). You can talk about social constructs and over moralizing all you want, but fucking a 10 year old CHILD cannot be justified. I don't know exactly where the age should be set at, but a 30 year old man fucking a 13 year old kid is fucked, and so is anyone who wants to try and justify it.

Fuck it, I'm getting into it again and I don't want to. There is so much bullshit in this thread I won't even try and sort it out. When you have a child of 12 tell me you won't be horrified to find out he/she was raped (oh, sorry, "had sex with") by an adult.

Edit: Didn't see this little gem:


The fact that many people here cannot distinguish between consentual and non-consentual sex is, frankly, quite disturbing. It's also kinda of pathetic how so called leftists all of a sudden turn into the Christian Coalition as soon as the people are under 18.

First off, stop the ad hominem, just because we are opposed to something and it is of a sexual nature does not mean we are Christians, or even moralists. This is a situation where you are doing DAMAGE to a person. Even if a kid consents at the time, you cannot tell me having sex with an old man will not damage the kid at some point in the future.

Frankly, I think it is kind of wrong for an 18 year old to be with a 40 year old, but there has to be a cut off age. I don't see it as a big deal for someone that's in his early 20's to have sex with someone in their late teens, I'm talking 16 or 17 here. I'm rambling, but what I'm trying to say is that there has to be some kind of cut off. 18 may be too high, but that's better than too low.

[elijahcraig]

There is simply no "justification" for the act of sex with a "child"--under 13 or so?--. Freud said it was a mental problem related to the inability of the person to progress past their childhood obsessions. It is curable through psychoanalysis supposedly.

I have problems with sex laws, 18 and under stuff....but attempting to attribute this to "morality" or whatever is nonsense. It is simply impossible for a child to consent, they don't even have the fully developed sexual organs required to enjoy sexual encounters.

Even in Greece...there was no penetration, it was a learning experience between man and boy, not a sexual relationship in the penetrating sense.

[BuyOurEverything]

Hey there, BuyOurEverything, you are a very pretty boy.

Aw, come on now, you're makin me blush...


Like someone else said before, you can't have consentual sex when you don't know what sex is or what sex organs do.

This is correct, you cannot consent to something if you don't know what it is. Tricking someone into 'consenting' is rape. Let's roleplay.

Rapist: Hey, wanna do some coitus?
Victim over the age of 18: (confused) Uh, sure... What's coitus?
Rapist: Oh, too late! You consented! (proceedes to rape her)

That's not consent just like tricking a kid isn't consent, get it?


First off, stop the ad hominem, just because we are opposed to something and it is of a sexual nature does not mean we are Christians, or even moralists.

I wasn't convering all the arguments or people here with this comment. I was referring to the numerous people who say it's 'sick' or 'wrong' or 'fucked'. You can't tell me that's not Christian based moralizing. All of a sudden when a contraversial topic comes up, everyone jumps on the conservative bandwagon for fear of being branded a 'freak' without considering it.


This is a situation where you are doing DAMAGE to a person.

I think I was pretty explicit about sex that causes physical damage or harm. In case I was unclear, I will say it again. It is wrong to have sex with someone who is undeveloped to the point that sex will damage them.


Even if a kid consents at the time, you cannot tell me having sex with an old man will not damage the kid at some point in the future.

How so?


When you have a child of 12 tell me you won't be horrified to find out he/she was raped (oh, sorry, "had sex with") by an adult.

Maybe, but I'm also 'horrified' to find out that my girlfriend fucked my friend, it doesn't mean he should be sent to jail, or even that I'm right.


I have problems with sex laws, 18 and under stuff....but attempting to attribute this to "morality" or whatever is nonsense.

How is it nonsense? Saying it's wrong to have sex with someone under 18 is a purely moralistic statement.


It is simply impossible for a child to consent, they don't even have the fully developed sexual organs required to enjoy sexual encounters.

I don't think anyone said otherwise.


I definately would not preach a "Judeo-Christian," form of morality, that would only promote pedophelia. How many people know about Noah being said to become, "drunk and naked," in front of his children? If that's how the christian prophets behave, I can't imagine what its most fanatical followers must think.

That doesn't neccessarily mean anything sexual , he was just a drunk. I've probably been drunk and at least mostly naked in front of my friends at some point in time, it doesn't mean there's any sexual connotation. Your claim that Noah was a paedophile is baseless and the implication that modern Judeo-Christian morality actually follows the bible is untrue.

[Saint-Just]

This is correct, you cannot consent to something if you don't know what it is. Tricking someone into 'consenting' is rape. Let's roleplay.

Rapist: Hey, wanna do some coitus?
Victim over the age of 18: (confused) Uh, sure... What's coitus?
Rapist: Oh, too late! You consented! (proceedes to rape her)

That's not consent just like tricking a kid isn't consent, get it?

A child does not have to be tricked into consenting since they can't comprehend what sex is and the affects it has because they lack knowledge and experience.


It is wrong to have sex with someone who is undeveloped to the point that sex will damage them.

Therefore, there must be an age at which it illegal to have sex to prevent this someone having sex from a person who would be physically damaged by it.


How is it nonsense? Saying it's wrong to have sex with someone under 18 is a purely moralistic statement.

It is nonsense because you use moral and moralistic in a pejorative manner. But, morality is important, morality underpins social relationships and is used to define the bounds of trust, kindness and affection.

[antieverything]

Maybe, but I'm also 'horrified' to find out that my girlfriend fucked my friend, it doesn't mean he should be sent to jail, or even that I'm right.
I don't think being pissed off about your girlfriend fucking your buddy amounts to you being a unliberated moralist who has to control her sexuality. In this example (assuming it is just that) you had your trust betrayed by two people close to you who did something they both knew would hurt you. Get off your "liberated" high horse and stop subscribing to this ridiculous idea that sexuality is completely a social construct!

[Urban Rubble]

So BOE, just to make sure we're on the same page.

If society didn't have age of consent laws, you would have no problem with a 40 year old man fucking a 10 year old girl, as long as she said it was O.K ? Is that what you're advocating ? And if not 10, what age ? 12 ? 13 ?

Would it be the same if this little girl was your daughter or sister ?

[BuyOurEverything]

A child does not have to be tricked into consenting since they can't comprehend what sex is and the affects it has because they lack knowledge and experience.

I knew what sex was when I was five, it's different for everybody. Obviously they lack the experience, but so do virgins of any age.


Therefore, there must be an age at which it illegal to have sex to prevent this someone having sex from a person who would be physically damaged by it.

Yes, that's probably true, although age doesn't neccessarily dictate maturity. People devolop at different ages. For practical purposes though, there probably would have to be a minimum age.


It is nonsense because you use moral and moralistic in a pejorative manner. But, morality is important, morality underpins social relationships and is used to define the bounds of trust, kindness and affection.

The only 'morals' I follow, and the only morals anyone should follow, is prevention of harm to nonconsenting parties. Relationships are subjective and different for everyone. Plus, you didn't deny that it was purely moralistic, you just said that moralizing isn't bad.


I don't think being pissed off about your girlfriend fucking your buddy amounts to you being a unliberated moralist who has to control her sexuality.

That's exactly what it is. This isn't a socially acceptable sexual practice, it violates the 'holy' concept of monogomy.


In this example (assuming it is just that) you had your trust betrayed by two people close to you who did something they both knew would hurt you.

Maybe, but only because society dictates that in a relationship, neither party can have sex with anyone else.

FYI, it's not 'just' an example, it happened 11 times in one weekend. Monogamy sucks.


Get off your "liberated" high horse and stop subscribing to this ridiculous idea that sexuality is completely a social construct!

If it wasn't, sexuality would be viewed the same way by all cultures. This is obviously not the case.


So BOE, just to make sure we're on the same page.

If society didn't have age of consent laws, you would have no problem with a 40 year old man fucking a 10 year old girl, as long as she said it was O.K ? Is that what you're advocating ? And if not 10, what age ? 12 ? 13 ?

It depends on the situation. If the 10 year old girl understands what sex is (and there's not reason she shouldn't), consiously consents to it, and is developed enough to physically be able to have sex, I don't really see a problem. Realistically there probably should be a minimum age where most people are developed enough to have sex, to prevent harm to little kids.


Would it be the same if this little girl was your daughter or sister ?

Objectively, yes. Realistically, I would probably be pissed off if anyone of any age fucked my daughter. Societal conventions are powerful even if they are wrong.

edit: this probably shouldn't be in websites.

[Red2K4]

Originally posted by Kurai_Tsuki+May 31 2004, 08:08 PM--> (Kurai_Tsuki @ May 31 2004, 08:08 PM)
[email protected] 27 2004, 09:41 PM
Stupid moralists. As long as no one is physically harmed, nothing's wrong with fucking little boys!

That is undoubtably the most immoral thing I have ever read in this forum. I would only hope that you never find a lady who will consent to have children with you. [/b]
jesus christ man, I hope you realize that pedophilia is not the same as incest. They are two different sexual illness. that is like saying "everyone who has sex with animals also watches people undress from the tree outside their home"



For practical purposes though, there probably would have to be a minimum age.


what age would you set it at?

[Urban Rubble]

It depends on the situation. If the 10 year old girl understands what sex is (and there's not reason she shouldn't), consiously consents to it, and is developed enough to physically be able to have sex, I don't really see a problem. Realistically there probably should be a minimum age where most people are developed enough to have sex, to prevent harm to little kids.

See, I'm sorry man, call me a Christian or a moralist or whatever you want, but that is completely fucked. Even if a 10 year old child knows that sex is, they are still too young to be making rational decisions about these types of things. I cannot believe you think that kids of that age are capable of making rational decisions about their sex lives. Society has created the institution of parenting for a reason, the reason is that kids are not always capable of doing what is best for them.

I would also like to know where you'd set the minimum age.

[Danton]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2004, 01:08 PM
"everyone who has sex with animals also watches people undress from the tree outside their home"

I can't help it, that Peacock was asking for it.. I swear..

[antieverything]

So, you don't actually believe you have a right to be upset at your girlfriend and friend? Uh, newsflash, she knew it would hurt you and didn't care, buddy! Screw the monogomy bit, this is about being inconsiderate!

[dopediana]

Society has created the institution of parenting for a reason, the reason is that kids are not always capable of doing what is best for them.


that is perfectly stated. i have a little sister who is 9 years old. she knows what sex is. how i do not know. but she is still innocent and naive in about 99% of everything and i believe that every kid should remain that way for as long as possible till they are developed enough to cope. to say that consensual intercourse with children is fine is practically condoning the exploitation of a fragile undeveloped or developing psyche.
it's not completely about morals. it's about ethics, man, and i don't care where anyone's sexual preference lies but leave the boys, girls, and animals alone and get a piece of tail that shares your level of maturity.

[Saint-Just]

That's exactly what it is. This isn't a socially acceptable sexual practice, it violates the 'holy' concept of monogomy.

Love and other emotions are social constructs; that does not make them undesirable. These emotions are the essence of humanity, they are a part of our consciousness. They help us to bond, achieve things and enjoy our lives.

What you are saying is rational in that morality does not have to exist. But I believe you have the wrong answer to the question of whether it should exist.

[antieverything]

Well, love is certainly not a social construct. It is a chemical response carefully designed to facilitate reproduction and subsequent mating behavior.

[Chad King]

For some reason, that website REALLY pisses me off...

[pandora]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 03:22 AM
In all probability, that is true, I didn't read any of the posts. I was just commenting on sex with kids in general.

TAT, I'm not sure one could safely have sex with a 6 year old, but perhaps it's not a great idea. I was refering more to 11-13 year olds. Sex with younger kids, however, is not the ghastly act it's made out to be.
Excuse my french but most of you guys who commented on the first page especially BOE are assholes.

What the hell are you talking about having sex with 12 year olds, perhaps we should send you to Iran where the totalitarian state allows you to marry 9 year old girls so you can ensure their virginity.

Of course it's rape. The only question on this is after age 16 and with peers within 5 years in age. I myself was a concubine at 15 and did not like it very much to a Columbian drug dealer. He was all right but some others did rape me and it was horrible.

Having been sexually taken advantage of at age 7 I don't really think you guys are aware of what you are saying here. Perhaps if the shoe were on the other foot.

By the way many of the "whores" as people here have referred to people in pornography and prostitution on this website are the products of what is called childhood sexual abuse for more infor on this checkout "Children of the Night" website at http://www.childrenofthenight.org/site (http://www.childrenofthenight.org) and see what happens to such children in Los Angeles, but perhaps the truth is too extreme for you.

Research it and get real, if you were real socialists you would be more interested in therapeutic safe houses in different countries and states such as Chiapas and England. But as usual you are only concerned with your penises.

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2004, 10:51 PM
Well, love is certainly not a social construct. It is a chemical response carefully designed to facilitate reproduction and subsequent mating behavior.
I think that is true, but like many natural feelings and desires it has developed to exist on a social level. And, often that is more important than the chemical reaction designed to facilitate reproduction. I don't subscribe to the idea that there is a subconscious sex drive that determines the majority of our actions and decisions.

[Urban Rubble]

Thank you pandora, good post. Perhaps BOE will read it and understand that raping a child (again, sorry, "having consensual sex with") is wrong no matter how much you want to label it as moralizing. I'm sorry you had to go through what you did.

[Soul Rebel]

I think that many of you who say its ok to have sex with children are extremely confused about many, many issues and dont understand the extent of how sex and sexuality affect us. Its really, really sad to see that many of you would actually support this.

Like other members, specifically antieverything, have pointed out, i also believe that because a child consents to sex with an adult it does not mean that they understand what they are doing and the consequences. Hell, most adults dont even understand sex and its consequences. A child does not have the capability to see beyond the physical act. They do not link the physical act with the emotions that they are feeling or may feel in the future. At that moment, they just see it as a physical thing and nothing else. They may feel its wrong or they dont like it but they dont really connect it with the physical act. Not until they are older will they make the connection between desire and sex, love and sex, fantasy and sex, etc. All of which may be fucked up because of their experience. They may spend their lives entirely without feeling the emotional aspect.

Many things need to be taken into consideration with this besides just the mental aspect. Think of bodily harm. There is no way you can have sex with a child and not harm them. For one, their bodies are still developing. Second, they are not as strong as adults and may be seriously harmed by the friction, by the force, etc. Just look at a child who has been molested- bruises are everywhere, their genitals bleed, etc. Finally, the fact that as adults people tend to have more than one sexual partner throughout the years and because many do contract some form of STDs, it poses a risk to a childs health. Children, most who do not understand a damn thing about sex, sexuality, or safety, should not have to be exposed to this or spend the rest of their lives being treated for an STD that they contracted when they were five, for example. Once again, look at children who have been molested- girls fom example suffer from vaginal infections (yeast infections for example). Sure adult womyn get it too (bacteria on the penis and lubrication are the main sources when contracted through sex), but young girls should not be experiencing this because it fucks up their bodies in many ways (possibility of infertility if not treated), but also mentally.

And finally, many are under the assumption that to be liberated you must be able to accept this- thats complete crap. Im very much a pro-sex and very sexually liberated woman and try to encourage and teach others about sexaulity, but i draw the line somewhere. A line does need to be drawn. Not because of morality, but because of safety and health (for children, who are the main focus here). By accepting this you are accepting the potential damage it will cause in many of the children involved.

[Vinny Rafarino]

BOE,

Normally I would attempt give you the psychological facts against your deluded and completely insane viewpoint, however I don't think you will listen.

You have crossed the line and deserve to be beaten severely.

[XXXX]

MY DEAR buyoureverything

My vast collection of abuses,expletives and profanities fail to come
up with a concrete and relevent word to abuse you with

But let it be known
That

When the revolution comes and come it will to the shit hole that you call
your home .All paedophiles and rapists will be castrated and thrown into
cages measuring 3feet x 3feet .

On one side of the cage will be a 36 inch Samsung Flat Tv
with dynamic sound and golden eye technology.
On which you will be shown your favorite paedophillic
and pornographic movies

Imagine watching porn and not having any male genitalia.

[The Feral Underclass]

It seems that the majority of people in this thread are so concerned with reacting to a popular position of rightousness that they are missing what BOE is trying to say.

Not once, throughout the thread did I see BOE say that paedophilia was acceptable. What I did see him do was "draw the line" as Senorah Che put it, between consentuial and non-consentuial sex.

Many of the reactions in this thread have been based on a very single perspective. Capitalist perspective. In a capitalist society children as we call them, are taught that they are stupid, taught that they are unable to make rational decisions. We make them believe they are incapable of thinking about their lives and tell them that we adults can make them on their behalf. We tell them that in fact adults making decisions for children is the right thing to do, and that they shouldn't, by the laws of reality, have any say in it. We choke them with their age because of their age. We tell them they are too stupid, to young and thus they become too stupid and to young.

...now lets think, hypothetically, that we didn't stifle the independence of children by restricting their actions and forcing them to believe they are stupid, immature and too naive to understand things and that our way is better, and actually give them the chance to think, be independent and mature, that maybe they will be able to form rational decisions about their own lives. If your only argument is experience then let me tell you there are many men and women who are well into their adult years who haven't experienced anything, yet are still able to fornicate! Life is not just about experience, it is about nurture and up bringing.

Age is a social construct, which we have attached some meaning too, and then justified it from that meaning. We havent asked, can children be mature about their own independence? We have commanded that children cannot be mature about their independence and therefore we will tell them how to behave.

I think the point BOE is trying to make is that children have the potential to make decisions about sex and just because it makes you all feel better to say that children are incapable, doesnt actually make it fact!

[antieverything]

I don't think BOE knows what point he is trying to make.


Age is a social construct, which we have attached some meaning too, and then justified it from that meaning. We havent asked, can children be mature about their own independence? We have commanded that children cannot be mature about their independence and therefore we will tell them how to behave.
Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong! Age is partially a social construct but it is also a real, physical limitation that makes children unable to operate on the same level as adults. Reality doesn't fit your "Happy Fun Land Hug-Fest" vision, TAT. Get over it. Other than making that point, I strongly agree with what you say about children being "stupid" because they are told they are stupid. It only goes so far, however. Even the most "liberated" six year old can still be easily manipulated. I'm not saying that children don't have sexuality...sex play begins at a very early age, after all. I'm saying that adults have no part in this sexuality and can easily exploit it.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 07:41 PM
Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong!
Oh really...prove it!


Age is partially a social construct but it is also a real, physical limitation that makes children unable to operate on the same level as adults.

Age has nothing to do with that. When I was 12 I had hair all over my body, and was coming up to six foot. Granted, some kids develop sooner than others, but I dont think that's really the point.

There are also reports of teenage boys commanding ships back in the 17th century. There are young girls and boys who I have seen here in Africa who carry huge pieces of logs on their heads while having babies strapped to them. Age does not determine your phyical appearence or your abilites to operate.


Reality doesn't fit your "Happy Fun Land Hug-Fest" vision, TAT.

What does this actually mean?


Get over it.

Get over what?


I'm saying that adults have no part in this sexuality.

And i'm saying what happens if the children are developed and are capable of making decisions about having sex with adults.


and can easily exploit it

Maybe in present day society, but I believe thinks are capable of changing..or is that just far to optimistic for you?

[dopediana]

There are also reports of teenage boys commanding ships back in the 17th century. There are young girls and boys who I have seen here in Africa who carry huge pieces of logs on their heads while having babies strapped to them. Age does not determine your phyical appearence or your abilites to operate.

in all the scenarios you mentioned, life expectancy was/is little more than half what it is in modern day developed countries. maturity comes earlier, reproduction comes earlier, death comes earlier. show me an 11 y/o who has hips capable of bearing children. show me an 11 y/o girl who has her period already. i got mine when i was 13.



And i'm saying what happens if the children are developed and are capable of making decisions about having sex with adults

who the heck are you to think the pedophilic adult should be allowed to assess that?



and can easily exploit it

Maybe in present day society, but I believe thinks are capable of changing..or is that just far to optimistic for you?

why do adults need to seek sexual release with children? is that not exploitation? someone young and vulnerable and naive and inexperienced? there is no equality in that relationship regardless of the intentions. and sexual relationships should be based on mutual affection, similar maturity, and equality--meaning each half of the pair is usually able to decide what is best for them and not allow themselves to be coerced and manipulated by the other half for any reason.

[BuyOurEverything]

kids are not always capable of doing what is best for them.


This may be true, however they have to potential to be taught how to make better decisions in many cases, such as this one. Also, many people in general are incapable of doing what's best for them, but nobody here (except maybe CM) advocates a state legislating people's sex lives.


I would also like to know where you'd set the minimum age.

Probably 12, unless the person is not physically developed enough to do so safely.


is still innocent and naive in about 99% of everything and i believe that every kid should remain that way for as long as possible

That's just whitewashing reality. Kids are 'innocent,' as much as you'd like them to be. Most people under 16 have sexual desires.


to say that consensual intercourse with children is fine is practically condoning the exploitation of a fragile undeveloped or developing psyche.

How about sex with stupid people?


it's not completely about morals. it's about ethics

Those terms do have different connotations, but I'd like to know what the real difference is.


Love and other emotions are social constructs; that does not make them undesirable. These emotions are the essence of humanity, they are a part of our consciousness. They help us to bond, achieve things and enjoy our lives.

Well, love is certainly not a social construct. It is a chemical response carefully designed to facilitate reproduction and subsequent mating behavior.

Love in its purest form is not a social contruct. How it is applied and how relationships are orginized are.


What you are saying is rational in that morality does not have to exist. But I believe you have the wrong answer to the question of whether it should exist.

What you are saying is that even if morality isn't rational, we should still practice it because it benefits society. Even if this is true, it doesn't mean we should adopt the morality of our current society.


What the hell are you talking about having sex with 12 year olds, perhaps we should send you to Iran where the totalitarian state allows you to marry 9 year old girls so you can ensure their virginity.

Of course it's rape. The only question on this is after age 16 and with peers within 5 years in age. I myself was a concubine at 15 and did not like it very much to a Columbian drug dealer. He was all right but some others did rape me and it was horrible.

Having been sexually taken advantage of at age 7 I don't really think you guys are aware of what you are saying here. Perhaps if the shoe were on the other foot.


That's horrible but it doesn't really pertain to this issue. Would rape and sexual servitude be acceptable if the victim was 18?


By the way many of the "whores" as people here have referred to people in pornography and prostitution on this website are the products of what is called childhood sexual abuse for more infor on this checkout "Children of the Night" website at http://www.childrenofthenight.org/site and see what happens to such children in Los Angeles, but perhaps the truth is too extreme for you.


Neither myself, nor anyone in this thread who advocated a similar position to myself, ever called sex workers whores. If you're going to insult me, fine, but please don't make stuff up that I would never say.


Research it and get real, if you were real socialists you would be more interested in therapeutic safe houses in different countries and states such as Chiapas and England. But as usual you are only concerned with your penises.

You're confusing two issues here. Any who forces women into relationships against their will should be shot.


But let it be known
That

When the revolution comes and come it will to the shit hole that you call
your home .All paedophiles and rapists will be castrated and thrown into
cages measuring 3feet x 3feet .

On one side of the cage will be a 36 inch Samsung Flat Tv
with dynamic sound and golden eye technology.
On which you will be shown your favorite paedophillic
and pornographic movies

Imagine watching porn and not having any male genitalia.


You're a weird dude.


in all the scenarios you mentioned, life expectancy was/is little more than half what it is in modern day developed countries.

This shows that younger people have the potential to do such things. The fact that life expectancy was shorter is irrelevant, it just shows that it is a cultural thing, not a physical one.

[antieverything]

TAT, if you can't see that your examples are silly and irrelevant I don't think we should continue this discussion. The fact that you hit puberty early is not applicable. I had pubic hair when I was 8, that doesn't mean I was somehow more able to perform as a mature member of society. The fact that there is some variation in people of the same age doesn't change the fact that younger people are less developed mentally and physically (when I said "physical barrier" I was refering to the physical development of the brain, by the way) than their older counterparts. The fact that childen are expected to fulfill adult responsibilities in other cultures doesn't mean they are as completely developed as older people.

I also think there is a certain rift in the discussion concerning the definition of pedophelia. Pedophelia isn't concerned with having sex with pubescent or adolescent "children." Rather it is a mental illness characterized by the urge to have sex with prepubescent children, often regardless of gender.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 09:34 PM
in all the scenarios you mentioned, life expectancy was/is little more than half what it is in modern day developed countries. maturity comes earlier, reproduction comes earlier, death comes earlier. show me an 11 y/o who has hips capable of bearing children. show me an 11 y/o girl who has her period already. i got mine when i was 13.

But as I have proven, children have the potentiol to be mature enough to make "adult" decisions. That was my point.


who the heck are you to think the pedophilic adult should be allowed to assess that?

I said what happens if the children are developed and are capable of making decisions about having sex with adults.


why do adults need to seek sexual release with children?

I think that's a good question. In greek times if you had young boy companions you had a better social standing. There was a whole etiquette of courting the child before you slept with them, and for many of the men they were in love with the child, adored them and lavished them with gifts. Maybe because of their virginity or the sexual desire to dominate. But who are we to judge what is and what isn't acceptable?


someone young and vulnerable and naive and inexperienced?

Being young is defined because you are vulnrabe, naive and inexperienced. We make children vulnrable by cloaking them in cotton wool, we make them naive by hiding them from their independence and we won't allow them to experience anything.

Also, there are loads of people who are 30, 40 even 50 who are still extremly naive and inexperienced. Should we restrict their right to have sex also.


there is no equality in that relationship regardless of the intentions.

If two people consent to having sex what business is it of yours?


and sexual relationships should be based on mutual affection, similar maturity, and equality

Why can a relationship between an adult and a child not be about mutual affection, why can someone not learn from someone else, and you will never find equality in a sexual relationship unless you are fucking yourself.


meaning each half of the pair is usually able to decide what is best for them and not allow themselves to be coerced and manipulated by the other half for any reason.

But children do have the potential to decide what is best for them.

And we coerce and manipulate children every single day. We force them to accept our rules and we manipulate them into believing that they are inferior to us, because of a number. We set guidlines, conditions, we tell them what is and what isn't acceptable and then we punish them if they dare step out of line. We restrict their natural urges to socialise, be independent and experience life, coercing and manipulating them into accepting our rules, our laws and we cast away any suggestion or any request they have about their lives. And as soon as we mention, dare mention indeed, the posisbility that they might be able to make decisions, and they might be able to do things with maturity and clarity the word paedophilia!, coercion!, manipulation! and threats of death and violence are thrown around. It's absurd! It's hypocritical and plain god damn wrong!

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 10:36 PM
TAT, if you can't see that your examples are silly and irrelevant I don't think we should continue this discussion.
Sorry, who are you again?


The fact that you hit puberty early is not applicable. I had pubic hair when I was 8, that doesn't mean I was somehow more able to perform as a mature member of society.

You said that age was about physical appearence. I said it wasn't and gave you an example why.


The fact that there is some variation in people of the same age doesn't change the fact that younger people are less developed mentally and physically

Physically maybe, mentally I think because we treat children to be stupid, naive and reliant on other people who are older to make their decisions for them.


(when I said "physical barrier" I was refering to the physical development of the brain, by the way) than their older counterparts.

There are some children who are infinatly more intelligent than adults and their brain hasn't developed the same size. A lot of childrens mental development comes from freedom of expression, freedom to think, freedom to be who they are.


The fact that childen are expected to fulfill adult responsibilities in other cultures doesn't mean they are as completely developed as older people.

They point is that they have the potential to be developed.


I also think there is a certain rift in the discussion concerning the definition of pedophelia. Pedophelia isn't concerned with having sex with pubescent or adolescent "children." Rather it is a mental illness characterized by the urge to have sex with prepubescent children, often regardless of gender.

I agree, pAedophilia is a problem, but are we to charactorise every desire to have sex with a child paedophilia just as we should charactorise every act of sodomy as a sin?

[XXXX]

Dear anarchist tension

Another cage measuring 3feetx3feet is waiting for you.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2004, 12:03 PM
Dear anarchist tension

Another cage measuring 3feetx3feet is waiting for you.
Can you justify your reactionary statements? Have you actually taken the time to read and understand what is being written. I assume you haven't. You're new to this board so I would suggest you start with something a little more substantial than threats. Now if you have an opinion, please let's see it.

[Dyst]

You just cannot have sex with a minor without, if not only hurting them mentally, destroying their future sex life. Adult sex are something completely different since both come to the terms and can say if their in it or not. When a pedophile has sex with a child younger than 10, the child really can't decide anything.

Also, it may not be a big of a deal at first for the child, it could of just been something that just "happened", but when he or she gets older (and learns more about those things) he/she will start to think about it and it will affect him/her mentally pretty bad, in most cases.

[Raisa]

Its nasty!

[Chad King]

Like I mentioned earlier, that website somewhat pisses me off.

I hate saying this, I really do... so please bear with me, this isnt easy... but that almost makes me wish there was some, at least a teeny bit, of limitations of free speech.

I braved a visit to the site, it disgusted me seeing peoples having avatars of their little boy lovers.

Thats all I really want to say.

[Palmares]

I'll get attacked for this, but I actually understand TAT and BOE.

They are not advocating sex without consent. They are simply trying to state that 'minors', perhaps around the age of 12 (age of puberty, loosely) could be capable of giving a 'mature' judgement on whether or not to engage in a sexual activity. This is also if the given circumstances exists, that is, society stopped treating children as stupid, naive, and everything inferior.

I personally would not engage in any sexual activity with anyone of such an age (I don't like older people either, my age is quite fine), but what they suggest could be possible. Of course it would be difficult to administer, given the many variables; physical maturity, mental maturity, etc.

Their argument is not at all about paedophilia, so let's put that aside for a moment.

Now, I believe this debate is about morals/ethics versus freedom (anarchistic freedom - not absolute freedom, but freedom as long as you do not infringe your freedom against others' freedom).

Related to this, do any of you think children aged around 12 should be allowed to engage in sexual activities with say, other 12 year olds?

I'll get attacked for this, but some people are attacking their arguement based on emotions, from the un-moral/ethical age difference in the sexual partners (which then perhaps gives it the stigma of paedophilia).

I'm ready to be ripped apart now... :unsure:

[Raisa]

Related to this, do any of you think children aged around 12 should be allowed to engage in sexual activities with say, other 12 year olds? >>>

Yes, their the same age, their both stupid! lol

[Chad King]

The hell? How many 12 year olds do you people know out there who are mentally and physically capable of a sexual relationship of any sorts? Think way back when you people were 12, was sex on your agenda on things to do other than pass the 6th grade?

Now, it might be absolutely possible for some 12 year old somewhere to be ready for it... but lets not let a miniority speak for the majority in this matter.

[Palmares]

Originally posted by Chad [email protected] 6 2004, 06:02 PM
The hell? How many 12 year olds do you people know out there who are mentally and physically capable of a sexual relationship of any sorts? Think way back when you people were 12, was sex on your agenda on things to do other than pass the 6th grade?

Now, it might be absolutely possible for some 12 year old somewhere to be ready for it... but lets not let a miniority speak for the majority in this matter.
That is in the current circmstances. The arguement is about if the right circumstances were present (children were not indoctrinated as being inferior all the time), and from there those who are physically and mentally able, could then engage in sexual activity if they give their consent.

We are in a capitalist society. This theory envisions a socialist/communist/anarchist society.

Whether those who would be physically and mentally mature in such a society would be minority or not, I cannot tell.

[Chad King]

Oh no! Im adressing the people here as people, not as Marxists or Capitalists... for arguments sake, screw that crap! How many people here knew at the exact age of 12 that they were sexually active? Again, Im not giving a damn about polital or philosophical views, Im talking to the people as people.

If you can honestly say at the age of 12, you were capable of a sexual based encounter, I guess more power to you, but please tell me, at what age did you lose your virginity? What Im getting at, is that you may have been ready, but people around you probably werent.

Damn, Im losing what I was getting at, curses this up all night crap...

Now, most people view 12 year olds as children, not quite a teenager yet and someone still blossoming as a person, what if they blossom into a person that doesnt want sex? Why force it upon them? Again, theyre blossoming at that point, about the age of 16 would (in my opinion) be fully ready for sex and the potential outcomes of it (STDs, other kids).

I lost my virginity on my 15th birthday, I really wish I hadnt, because the girl ended up being someone Ill probably find on 5th and Main in another 10 years. Now, imagine how the story would change had you lost your sexual virginity (in general) to some 40 year old, hairy, unevolved looking neanderthal who is mentally unstable? Talk about an awesome childhood memory.

[Palmares]

You have a problem with me talking about people, as a society (sociology - socialism, capitalism, etc)?

Your counter has nothing to do with what I am trying to say. For my arguemnt is a hypothetical in different circumstances, as your's is the current standing of the world. As the arguement would go, your counter is simply explained by the indoctrination of inferiority upon children. Physical maturity of course depends on the person.

But... in the current circumstances...?

I guess I have to think about when I first started, or should I say desired to engage in sexual activities with the opposite sex. Grade 6 I think. That would have made me... 11 or 12. it usually happens when you hit puberty (for males, the voice is the tell tale sign). Some guys had it before me, but most about my age. I can't speak for girls of course.

I'm a virgin, so I can't comment on the rest of what you said.

You made me think of something. According to what I have read, females are at their peak for having children usually at the age of 18. Of course if you are your 20's you are still quite capable, but the deteriation starts early 20's. I dunno, that has to do with physical maturity.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by Chad [email protected] 6 2004, 10:29 AM
If you can honestly say at the age of 12, you were capable of a sexual based encounter
Children that age have the potential to!


Now, most people view 12 year olds as children

That's exactly the problem.


not quite a teenager yet and someone still blossoming as a person,

If they were treated differently how do you know that they won't already have blossomed?


Why force it upon them?

:angry: Nobody is talking about force!


about the age of 16 would (in my opinion) be fully ready for sex and the potential outcomes of it (STDs, other kids).

Why at 16? Why not at 17 or 15? How do you know that a child of 12 isbnt capable of udnerstanding if they were treated like normal human biengs rather than as children.


Now, imagine how the story would change had you lost your sexual virginity (in general) to some 40 year old, hairy, unevolved looking neanderthal who is mentally unstable?

But what if it was a personal choice by someone who was fully in control of their ability to decide and consented?

[Chad King]

You have a problem with me talking about people, as a society (sociology - socialism, capitalism, etc)?


Thats not what Im saying, I was saying put political/philosophical/religious views aside and speak from how you feel as a person.



Your counter has nothing to do with what I am trying to say. For my arguemnt is a hypothetical in different circumstances, as your's is the current standing of the world. As the arguement would go, your counter is simply explained by the indoctrination of inferiority upon children. Physical maturity of course depends on the person.
[\QUOTE]

I understand that physical maturity depends on the person, but there are just some things children, or 12 year olds, whatever, cant do... I mean, Id laugh if society got to the point where we decided 12 year olds were mature and I was speeding down the road and got pulled over by a 12 year old cop... its not going to happen, the 12 year old mind isnt fully developed.

[QUOTE]
I guess I have to think about when I first started, or should I say desired to engage in sexual activities with the opposite sex. Grade 6 I think. That would have made me... 11 or 12. it usually happens when you hit puberty (for males, the voice is the tell tale sign). Some guys had it before me, but most about my age. I can't speak for girls of course.


Right, like I was saying, you were beginning to blossom and were still ignorant to a lot of things happening.



Children that age have the potential to!


I have the potential to shoot you in the face with a 9mm for no apparent reason, that doesnt make my action right in any form.



That's exactly the problem.


Im not seeing a problem at all... again, there are some things a 12 year old cant do, so how are they somehow not inferior to a full blown adult.



If they were treated differently how do you know that they won't already have blossomed?


Again, there is the occasional miniority in this argument, but I have yet to see a 12 year old with pubes, a deep voice and a full beard, which means they really havent gone through puberty all the way and again, are still learning about their body.



Nobody is talking about force!


I am. Lets say we decide 12 year olds are capable of having sex, and a 12 year old gets raped, does that make it right? Not every 12 year old wants sex. Its going to happen, why not hand loaded guns to known criminals. Again, like Ive been saying, a 12 year old has no real idea of what theyre getting into, theyre busy wanting to be President or something...



Why at 16? Why not at 17 or 15? How do you know that a child of 12 isbnt capable of udnerstanding if they were treated like normal human biengs rather than as children.


I was taking 16 as a somewhat example, at 16 youre damn near done developing and almost done with puberty, most likely you understand your body more and have some idea of what makes you, you, as a person.



But what if it was a personal choice by someone who was fully in control of their ability to decide and consented?


I really dont want to repeat what I just said, for my sake, Im going to simply say that 12 year olds are pretty ignorant.

[XXXX]

Are you guys retarted? :huh:

You all want to fuck 12 yr old girls and boys?

Sick is the closest word that I can come to but it is
does not convey even one bit of what i feel.

The age's between 10 and 15 are the golden years of innocence
when your world is small and so happy and you get great joys from
such trivial and small things.

At 12 girls should play around with their mom's lipstick and
not experiment with her mom's contraceptives.

At 12 girls should play with barbies and not dildo's.

At 12 girls should wonder what these irritating things called boys are
not think of with which of her class boys she will sleep with tonight.

Now coming to the whole purpose of sex.

What is the purpose of sex?
Reproduction and pleasure.

So you want turn 12 year old girls into mothers?
or is it that you sick paedophiles dream of giving pleasure to
young virgin girls.

Also why should anyone have sex before marriage.
Why can't they wait till they have met the man who they know love and
would like to live with for the rest oftheir life.

What benefits does a promiscious lifestyle offer?That you are advocating
it to 12 year old kids.

there is great joy in innocence.
Please don't steal it from young boys and girls .

Also if you guys think if a 12 year old girl is fit enough
to decide about her sexual rights then I think its ok with you guys
if kids drive cars,marry each other,drink alcohol and own guns.

Freedom should be given to those who are fit for it and
know how to use it responsibily

Do not forget

THE CHILD IS THE FATHER OF MAN

By fucking kids you paedophiles are doing no good to this world.

Comrades
Whenever you see cockroaches like buyoureverthing and anarchisttension.
Crush them with the heel of your shoe.

By crushing them you are may think its useless because ther are other
cockroaches and they have known to have survived for billions of years
and paedophiles will always come back
and in all possibility survive for another billion years

But think of the handful of kids to whom you would have made a difference
Who will lead a better life because of you.

[Chad King]

Wow, that was very angry and totally not what the rest of the conversation was currently about.

Awesome.

For what its worth, I dont think anyone on this forum directly said they wanted to have sex with a 12yr old, its just discussing the idea of pedophilia. So calm your little argument down some.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by Chad [email protected] 6 2004, 11:30 AM
I have the potential to shoot you in the face with a 9mm for no apparent reason, that doesnt make my action right in any form.
I don't think you understand the point. Shooting someone in the face is not the same as consenting to sex.


Im not seeing a problem at all... again, there are some things a 12 year old cant do

That's the point. Now they aren't, and the argument here is whether or not they have the potential to. Do...you...understand?!


so how are they somehow not inferior to a full blown adult.

I'm not saying they are an equal to an adult. I am saying that they have the potential to make decisions in a mature and clear way. How many more times do I need to say this to you....Read what is being written!!


I am. Lets say we decide 12 year olds are capable of having sex, and a 12 year old gets raped, does that make it right?

Are you a retard? Is that what the problem is? Rape is wrong. It is wrong when it is a 12 year old person or when its a 42 year old person. If someone is able to consent to sex and then doesnt consent to it and is forced into the act, then it is wrong. Regardless of age!


Its going to happen, why not hand loaded guns to known criminals

But it happens now and it's against the law.


Again, like Ive been saying, a 12 year old has no real idea of what theyre getting into, theyre busy wanting to be President or something...

That is because society conditions childrent o behave like children. We force them to be inexperienced, vulnrable and naive because of their age. Do you not think that its possible that if we didn't do that they could behave in a more mature way.


at 16 youre damn near done developing and almost done with puberty, most likely you understand your body more and have some idea of what makes you, you, as a person

No...Your body has not finished developing at the age of 16. That's a lie. And you only understand more about sex and your body because you are exposed to more information about it.


I really dont want to repeat what I just said, for my sake, Im going to simply say that 12 year olds are pretty ignorant.

Yes, and there's a reason for that, we make them ignorant!

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2004, 12:33 PM
You all want to fuck 12 yr old girls and boys?

Sick is the closest word that I can come to but it is
does not convey even one bit of what i feel.

The age's between 10 and 15 are the golden years of innocence
when your world is small and so happy and you get great joys from
such trivial and small things.

At 12 girls should play around with their mom's lipstick and
not her mom's contraceptives.

At 12 girls should play with barbies and not dildo's.

At 12 girls should wonder what these irritating things called boys are
not think of with which of her class boys she will sleep with tonight.

Now coming to the whole purpose of sex.

What is the purpose of sex?
Reproduction and pleasure.

So you want turn 12 year old girls into mothers?
or is it that you sick paedophiles dream of giving pleasure to
young virgin girls.

Also why should anyone have sex before marriage.
Why can't they wait till they have met the man who they know love and
would like to live with for the rest oftheir life.

What benefits does a promiscious lifestyle offer?That you are advocating
it to 12 year old kids.

there is great joy in innocence.
Please don't steal it from young boys and girls .

Also if you guys think if a 12 year old girl is fit enough
to decide about her sexual rights then I think its ok with you guys
if kids drive cars,marry each other,drink alcohol and own guns.

Freedom should be given to those who are fit for it and
know how to use it responsibily

Do not forget

THE CHILD IS THE FATHER OF MAN

By fucking kids you paedophiles are doing no good to this world.

Comrades
Whenever you see cockroaches like buyoureverthing and anarchisttension.
Crush them with the heel of your shoe.

By crushing them you are may think its useless because ther are other
cockroaches and they have known to have survived for billions of years
and paedophiles will always come back
and in all possibility survive for another billion years

But think of the handful of kids to whom you would have made a difference
Who will lead a better life because of you.
My mother always use to say "the one that shouts the loudest has the most to hide." I think she was right.

[XXXX]

Do you accsue me of being a peadophile?

You asked for it and I gave it to you
But
You haven't answered any of my points??

[Chad King]

I don't think you understand the point. Shooting someone in the face is not the same as consenting to sex.


Given, its not, Im approaching the standpoint that I have the potential to make that decision, but that doesnt make it a correct decision, nor is there anything to say Im in the correct mindset to make such a decision.



That's the point. Now they aren't, and the argument here is whether or not they have the potential to. Do...you...understand?!


Do you understand that almost everything Ive been saying pretty much says how unlikely it is that a 12yr old would have that much potential?



I'm not saying they are an equal to an adult. I am saying that they have the potential to make decisions in a mature and clear way. How many more times do I need to say this to you....Read what is being written!!


How? Theyre not even mature as people! Like the idiot that posted in between us said, they should be playing with Barbies and not Dildos! Why dont you also take your advice and read what I am saying, it is of my opinion, from having been a 12yr old, that it is incredibly unlikely to have the maturity to begin to truly conceive of sex.



Are you a retard? Is that what the problem is? Rape is wrong. It is wrong when it is a 12 year old person or when its a 42 year old person. If someone is able to consent to sex and then doesnt consent to it and is forced into the act, then it is wrong. Regardless of age!


No, but with as many times as Ive had to repeat myself in this discussion, Im beginning to feel insane (to repeat something several times hoping for a different result). Yeah, rape is wrong, but allowing a 12yr old to consent to sex only opens up the doors for more rape, now at a younger age. How easy manipulated can a 12yr old be? Pretty damn easy, and since they could consent to sex... they would get fucked, literally... and that is rape.



But it happens now and it's against the law.


Doesnt make it right, and again, giving consent to children would open the doors for it to happen more.



That is because society conditions childrent o behave like children. We force them to be inexperienced, vulnrable and naive because of their age. Do you not think that its possible that if we didn't do that they could behave in a more mature way.


The hell? How can society condition a child to be what they are, a child? Man, thats like saying if someone a newborn could speak, we should give him voting and drinking rights because hes obviously much more mature than anyone else his age... but thats impossible, why? Because the human body has boundaries, and 12yr olds have boundaries that an 18 or 21yr old does not have. Muscle mass for example... if a 12yr old worked out religiously, their body would not develop the same as, say, a 20yr old... because their body isnt conditioned at that time to do so.



No...Your body has not finished developing at the age of 16. That's a lie. And you only understand more about sex and your body because you are exposed to more information about it.


Again, I was somewhat using the age of 16 as an example. Yeah, youre more exposed to it because society feels comfortable, that as a person, you are mature enough to handle the material, for your hormones are running away with you anyways at that point in time. There's a reason sex ed. really isnt in the 5th or 6th grade range... because its not a common 5th or 6th grader past time.



Yes, and there's a reason for that, we make them ignorant!


Heh... er... kids are ignorant by themselves, thats why they are put through 12 years of schooling...

[The Feral Underclass]

So yeah....i'm not going to try a tenth time...anyone else wonna have a go?

[Chad King]

Hehe, I thought for sure youd tried to quote me on something once again. My poor little dialup connection cant keep up with constant flaming ;)

[XXXX]

Crush the cockroaches!!!!!

[Chad King]

You trying to crush AnarchistTension and Buywhateverhisnameis?

From what Ive seen, AnarchistTension is a really secure guy, so have fun!

I think Im going to go watch Scarface in a bit, because "he crush you, crush you like a cockroach!"

[Soul Rebel]

XXXX- why dont you try to post something a bit more meaningful or with some substance? Rather than insult everyone and saying that we're all into padeophilia try reading what people are actually saying. TAT and BOE are in no way saying that they are into it or even that kids should be having sex (with adults)- they are giving reasons as to why children may be capable of having sex and looking at the way children are treated. So please stop with the crazy ass comments.

[XXXX]

If you can't crush them then spray them with HIT
GAS these paedophiles to their death

[XXXX]

Anyone who promotes the interests of paedophiles
will be branded a paedophile and crushed like a cockroach

[The Feral Underclass]

But nobody is promoting paedophilia.

Please stop posting the pictures of cocroaches.

[XXXX]

Anarchist please anwer these questions which I had asked before


What benefits does a promiscious lifestyle offer?That you are advocating
it to 12 year old kids.

Also if you guys think if a 12 year old girl is fit enough
to decide about her sexual rights then I think its ok with you guys
if kids drive cars,marry each other then divorce,drink alcohol and own guns?

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 10:13 AM
What benefits does a promiscious lifestyle offer?That you are advocating
it to 12 year old kids.
It isn't about what you think is acceptable or what I think is acceptable, it is about personal choice.


Also if you guys think if a 12 year old girl is fit enough
to decide about her sexual rights

I think people that young have the potential to be fit enough to decide such things.


then I think its ok with you guys
if kids drive cars,marry each other then divorce,drink alcohol and own guns?

If someone is able to behave in a rational, respectful and logical manner then what is the problem if someone choices to drive a car, marry and divorce, drink alcohol or own a fire arm.

[The question of owning a gun is different however because noone should have a need to own a gun]

[antieverything]

Just for the record, I agree (in principle) with the Youth Rights platform of the Young People's Socialist League though it is important to recognize that it is not to be taken outside the context of demands for a completely new form of social organization.

http://www.ypsl.org/lit/yrp.php

But this is basically saying adolescents shouldn't be exploited and oppressed like they are now...it says little about pre-adolescents. I will repeat that pedophelia can never be consentual because it is exclusively a disorder dealing with having sex with very young children.

That being said, this sort of view towards sexuality and children would need an overhaul of rape legislation because I guarantee you that even in a socialist society with liberated youth, any sicko with a bit of intelligence can get into a kids pants with only a bit of effort using mind games.

[antieverything]

And TAT, I still maintain that your examples are ridiculous and irrelevant. Because children in some cultures are/were expected to carry out adult responsibilities doesn't mean that they are as emotionally developed as adults.

Do you suggest we throw everything we know about the actual, physical development of the human brain out the window?

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by a[email protected] 7 2004, 07:07 PM
And TAT, I still maintain that your examples are ridiculous and irrelevant.
How unfortunate for you.


Because children in some cultures are/were expected to carry out adult responsibilities doesn't mean that they are as emotionally developed as adults.

Possibly.


Do you suggest we throw everything we know about the actual, physical development of the human brain out the window?

No.


any sicko with a bit of intelligence can get into a kids pants with only a bit of effort using mind games

But that applies to anyone. Not just children.

[XXXX]

Originally posted by The Anarchist Tension+Jun 7 2004, 08:40 AM--> (The Anarchist Tension @ Jun 7 2004, 08:40 AM)
[email protected] 7 2004, 10:13 AM
What benefits does a promiscious lifestyle offer?That you are advocating
it to 12 year old kids.
It isn't about what you think is acceptable or what I think is acceptable, it is about personal choice.


Also if you guys think if a 12 year old girl is fit enough
to decide about her sexual rights

I think people that young have the potential to be fit enough to decide such things.


then I think its ok with you guys
if kids drive cars,marry each other then divorce,drink alcohol and own guns?

If someone is able to behave in a rational, respectful and logical manner then what is the problem if someone choices to drive a car, marry and divorce, drink alcohol or own a fire arm.

[The question of owning a gun is different however because noone should have a need to own a gun][/b]


Dude I had typed a very long reply but it got erased after I presssd the back button
I don't feel like typing it all over again.

But I have only one point to say
Today paedophiles are convicted only because there is a law which makes sex with minors illegal.

If this law is scrapped paedophiles will be given a free hand and
whenever a paedophile is caught he will plead that he had it with the child's consent.Which creates innumerable complications and most of the times the child
will remain untraceable to get the childsversion of the story.

Mkaing sex with children legal is like giving a paedophile an open invitation to come
fuck our little brothers and sisters.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 07:36 PM
Today paedophiles are convicted only because there is a law which makes sex with minors illegal.
They still do it though.


If this law is scrapped paedophiles will be given a free hand and
whenever a paedophile is caught he will plead that he had it with the child's consent.Which creates innumerable complications and most of the times the child
will remain untraceable to get the childsversion of the story

People rape people all the time, even though it's illegal, and then claim the other person consented.

Stopping paedophiles from having sex with children doesn't work, otherwise they wouldn't do it. Children have the potential to make decisions about sex. In which case we have no right to restrict that freedom.

As antieverythingthatsnotme said. Paedophilia is a mental illness and restricting childrens freedom isnt going to solve that problem.


Mkaing sex with children legal is like giving a paedophile an open invitation to come
fuck our little brothers and sisters.

They don't need an invitation, they will do it regardless.

[XXXX]

Whatever you say dude,I just don't feel like arguing anymore.

How does it matter if 2 idiots on a forum are arguing about paedophiles

Right now somewhere in the world Children are still getting fucked with or with out their consent

and i find this to be sad I don't know about you
Probably you are celebrating it as the sexual liberation of chilldren

[antieverything]

Originally posted by The Anarchist Tension+Jun 7 2004, 05:14 PM--> (The Anarchist Tension @ Jun 7 2004, 05:14 PM)
[email protected] 7 2004, 07:07 PM
And TAT, I still maintain that your examples are ridiculous and irrelevant.
How unfortunate for you.


Because children in some cultures are/were expected to carry out adult responsibilities doesn't mean that they are as emotionally developed as adults.

Possibly.


Do you suggest we throw everything we know about the actual, physical development of the human brain out the window?

No.


any sicko with a bit of intelligence can get into a kids pants with only a bit of effort using mind games

But that applies to anyone. Not just children. [/b]
No, it doesn't apply to everyone. It applies especially to children. If I could have sex with people my own age with the promise of candy...ok, maybe it is the same thing just with cars and money. Nevermind.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 07:54 PM
Whatever you say dude,I just don't feel like arguing anymore.

How does it matter if 2 idiots on a forum are arguing about paedophiles

Right now somewhere in the world Children are still getting fucked with or with out their consent

and i find this to be sad I don't know about you
Probably you are celebrating it as the sexual liberation of chilldren
Please stop reacting so badly. I am not advocating paedophilia or sex with children. I think that sexual abuse and child rape is absolutly digusting and abhorent, just as sexual abuse and rape against adults is.

If you cannot see that then you're a fool.

[XXXX]

Whatever man....Whatever

I am actually a restricted member
When I saw this article I thought I had to give you all a
piece of my mind.
Looks like I thought wrong

Anyway this identity has failed its purpose

See you man

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2004, 08:07 PM
I am actually a restricted member
Don't do that again.


When I saw this article I thought I had to give you all a
piece of my mind.
Looks like I thought wrong

Yes. Your overreaction was wrong and irrelevant.

[XXXX]

QUOTE
When I saw this article I thought I had to give you all a
piece of my mind.
Looks like I thought wrong

Yes. Your overreaction was wrong and irrelevant. [QUOTE]

NO what I meant was I have failed in making you people see my point

[The Feral Underclass]

I saw your point...the problem is, you didnt see mine.

Now I know who you are and i'm deleting this user name.

[pandora]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 11:48 PM

Probably 12, unless the person is not physically developed enough to do so safely.
essence of
me:

What the hell are you talking about having sex with 12 year olds, perhaps we should send you to Iran where the totalitarian state allows you to marry 9 year old girls so you can ensure their virginity.
reply:
YOU STILL HAVEN"T ANSWERED THIS QUESTION HOW IS WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING DIFFERENT THAN THE MARRIAGE LAW IN IRAN.
me:


Of course it's rape. The only question on this is after age 16 and with peers within 5 years in age. I myself was a concubine at 15 and did not like it very much to a Columbian drug dealer. He was all right but some others did rape me and it was horrible.

Having been sexually taken advantage of at age 7 I don't really think you guys are aware of what you are saying here. Perhaps if the shoe were on the other foot.

Buy Our Everything

That's horrible but it doesn't really pertain to this issue. Would rape and sexual servitude be acceptable if the victim was 18?
Reply:
You don't seem to understand this issue very well, by your standard I would seem consensual at 7 because I thought the person was being kind, and being a street kid I thought they were loving, but that was not the case.

I had an early childhood sexuality as a result, and I can safely say as a child I was not interested, neither were other overtly sexual child sexual abuse victims I knew who had a sexual desire, artificially inspired by 7 or 8, interested in engaging in sexual acts with adults.

We did engage in acts with each other, but that was more a mix of processing and childhood experimentation. There was a big difference between that and if someone's 12 or 14 year old cousin were interested in us, that would be gross and traumatic. Enjoying skinny dipping in my friends pool at that age there was that concern, and me and my friends were like eww get away.

There is a huge difference in dating and flirtation between children the same age and older children or adults. Although a child the same age can rape, but that's a different issue.

Any molestation by an older person is childhood sexual abuse, and results in sexual confusion and or trauma. Perhaps you need to look up the advice of a psychologist on this. I am speaking having studied childhood sexual abuse at the college level for schools, and it's not just policy, there are a lot of books on the issue, if you wish I will give you a list.

Me:

By the way many of the "whores" as people here have referred to people in pornography and prostitution on this website are the products of what is called childhood sexual abuse for more infor on this checkout "Children of the Night" website at http://www.childrenofthenight.org/site and see what happens to such children in Los Angeles, but perhaps the truth is too extreme for you.


BOG

Neither myself, nor anyone in this thread who advocated a similar position to myself, ever called sex workers whores. If you're going to insult me, fine, but please don't make stuff up that I would never say.

Reply:
You are right, although such comments were made on this site mostly it has been from others, who are very judgemental in this aspect towards worker consciousness.

But you still have not addressed the fact that the "Children of the Night" is an organization that deals with the sexual exploitation of children, and that most and arguably all children who are abused, by the way any sex with children is considered childhood sexual abuse and is psychologically understood as having certain traumatic consequences.

Your arguement holds no water. In referring to the above association I refer to associations like those mentioned below which deal with the aftershocks of childhood sexual abuse, in long term cases it often ends in prostitution, as either the child leaves home to live on the streets to escape the abuse or they are prostituted by their parents.

Children of the Night can COMFORTABLY say that all prostitution cases of children under the age of 12 usually involve the parents. That's not molestation but prostitution, as initial molestation is easier to acheive unfortunately.

Me:

Research it and get real, if you were real socialists you would be more interested in therapeutic safe houses in different countries and states such as Chiapas and England. But as usual you are only concerned with your penises.
BOG:

You're confusing two issues here. Any who forces women into relationships against their will should be shot.


No unfortunately you are confusing to issues here, I was not referring only to the domestic abuse of spouses, but to safe houses in England for victims of childhood sexual abuse where they are actually short funding to have children with sexual issues live with therapists who can help them heal and treat them with respect and heal.

Having done a lot of research on this issue, this discussion except for Senora Che's comments greatly sadden me.

Reading the works and working with counselors who deal specifically with the victims of childhood sexual abuse using sand boxes, art therapy and role playing to help them to dramatize what has been done to them, and how they react, I am greatly saddened by the lack of understanding of how children are affected by this.

I am reminded of the verocity with which even small child victims attack another person they perceive as a victim in their position, as a clue to the anger these small people feel. The greatest gift one can give one of these children is the safety of knowing they will never be molested by that person again, that they are behind bars.

I also know individuals who interview pedophiles in the criminal justice system, and they always say the 9 year old came on to them, it's disgusting. A nine year old does not ask for it, end of story, they are not responsible for adults taking advantage of them, neither are 12 year olds, that's pre-high school, and most freshmen (US) are very immature emotionally, even if some of them have bodies that are begining to bloom. Working with them in classrooms I try to be stoic and give them a sense of respect for their bodies, they are usually just begining to date the more mature ones, but not sexually active yet, it's more about peer identification and being seen with someone attractive.

If you speak to these kids you would know they are often confused, they have good ideas, but their minds are not fully formed or organized yet. They cannot give consent, they have a hard time making deep decisions, they are in training, working with kids you really see it, kids don't start being able to actualize decisions until 17 and then it's training wheels on things.

I was independent at 15-16, but I now know I was guessing and winging it a lot, and running on luck and the care of strangers who cared about kids, and tried to help me out as a New York City Bike Messenger.

The worst thing with young teenagers is they don't know their limits yet on sex, drugs, alcohol etc, even city kids are experimenting, and trying to be cool, so they may be less able to resist things, as the ego and self-esteem to say "No, Fuck Off" is not developed enough yet, especially concerning adults, they can be confused.

I could by that age, but only because I had already been raped. Otherwise I would have been more open to attack, there's a lot of predators who prey on young people esp. who are attractive, and have lack of family support, and these guys are really nasty and need to be prosecuted. Because they don't stop at one person, they absconde as many young girls or boys depending as possible, I remember individuals who took advantage of or raped, both instances occurred, speaking of other girls they had taken advantage of, that helped me realize the extent of the problem.

Also as an erotic dancer I became aware rather quickly that many of my co-dancers and work wives were the victims of childhood sexual abuse. It creates a mental trauma which the victim tries to process often by replaying events, for young women who learn to take care of themselves, dancing can seem like a safe place to work these issues out, but often the same abuse issues with body image can creep in.

Worse off now you deal with the perps, assholes who want to see the girl who just turned 18 even though they are 47 and their daughter is the same age, but you have to be nice to them to make money. NOthing is more disgusting than watching a young woman who you know was molested playing up to that image again to make money and getting stuck in that reprocessing trauma trap.
A lot of long-term dancers have this going on. Nothing against the performance qualities, I'm talking about lap dances.

BOG You still are not being clear on certain issues, I wonder if you even know your own mind.

You discount arguements that are in fact proofs, I do not understand your reasoning except that it furthers your point of view.

You have not really addressed the content of Senora Che or my comments.

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

Originally posted by "The Anarchist Tension"
People rape people all the time, even though it's illegal, and then claim the other person consented.

Stopping paedophiles from having sex with children doesn't work, otherwise they wouldn't do it. Children have the potential to make decisions about sex. In which case we have no right to restrict that freedom.

As antieverythingthatsnotme said. Paedophilia is a mental illness and restricting childrens freedom isnt going to solve that problem.

They don't need an invitation, they will do it regardless.

What a bright way to look at life. People still murder and that is illegal, so lets just legalize murder! You're saying that people will molest children dispite it being illegal. This is true, people will always break the law. It is not right for a grown man to have sex with a child, even if they are mature at 13, 14, 15 or 16 years old. That is just sick. Teenagers having sex with each other is not a problem like this but is still not really necessary.

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by The wise old [email protected] 18 2004, 10:36 AM
What a bright way to look at life. People still murder and that is illegal, so lets just legalize murder!
That isn't what I said, and I suggest you go back and re-read what I wrote, apply that grey matter and think.


You're saying that people will molest children dispite it being illegal.

Yes.


It is not right for a grown man to have sex with a child, even if they are mature at 13, 14, 15 or 16 years old.

Why isn't it right? If someone that young can physically and mentally be capable of making the choice and performing the act, what "right" do you have to stop it?


That is just sick.

Based on what?


having sex with each other is not a problem like this but is still not really necessary.

How do you know what is or what isn't necessary for people? You can only speak for yourself and you are one person out of 6 billion. What you think is necessary is really of no consequence to anyone else.

[DRS]

There was a teacher at my school who was a paedophile, he had that kind of stuff on his computer at school!

and this was around the time when them 2 girls had been kidnapped and murdered, weird this, they seemed to cover it up pretty well

[Hawker]

Here's an article from Somethingawful.com on their Weekend Web section making fun of Boybliss.com

Now when I first saw these posts I literally cringed in my seat.

http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2140

[Lacrimi de Chiciură]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 18 2004, 03:55 AM



Why isn't it right? If someone that young can physically and mentally be capable of making the choice and performing the act, what "right" do you have to stop it?

Ok, I myself am that young but I think that there is a big difference between a 50 year old and a 13 year old. How often do you see a 13 year old boy and a 50 year old man going for a walk or going to a movie? How often do people with that big of an age gap become friends? Usually when a pedophile is having sex with a kid they are doing something to them to force them to have a relationship with them or rape them.


How do you know what is or what isn't necessary for people? You can only speak for yourself and you are one person out of 6 billion. What you think is necessary is really of no consequence to anyone else.

I didn't say that there was anything wrong with it. What I meant was that the purpose of sex for most people during 12-18 years old is just for pleasure, not for making babies. meh

[The Feral Underclass]

Originally posted by The wise old [email protected] 24 2004, 10:26 PM
Ok, I myself am that young but I think that there is a big difference between a 50 year old and a 13 year old. How often do you see a 13 year old boy and a 50 year old man going for a walk or going to a movie? How often do people with that big of an age gap become friends? Usually when a pedophile is having sex with a kid they are doing something to them to force them to have a relationship with them or rape them.
You have missed my point entirely.

I said if a child that young is capable of making a decision or performing then we have no right to stop it, if that child makes that decision.


I didn't say that there was anything wrong with it. What I meant was that the purpose of sex for most people during 12-18 years old is just for pleasure, not for making babies. meh

But that has no relevance to anything.

[Subversive Pessimist]

edit

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2004, 01:52 PM
my semi-psycho friend becky linked me to this site so i could get a laugh.
http://www.boybliss.net
go to the forums. these people are freaking NUTS........
I bet there's a tracer on that site that will follow everyone who's been to it :lol: . Just kidding. Pedophilia is sick. I wonder why the Greeks not only didn't condemn it, but it was widespread. :unsure: