Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What is one of the reasons women say that a man hitting a woman is wrong...? That's right, that they are typically weaker than men so then the damage is harder on them. So women and feminists themselves know that what you said is true.
If it's because women can't handle the rigors of prison, why are there female correctional facilities to begin with?
So if society goes "easier" on women, why do ya'll make an issue of double standards like women and sexuality? Clearly if we as a society believe women are such angels, feminists wouldn't think it's worth fighting for to say that they should screw whoever they want without being called names...
Fact of the matter is this woman did a disgusting crime. And out of all of the other petty BS non-sense feminists fight over (i.e. "man-spreading", "man-splaining", bathroom sizes, etc.) they could fight against this if they wanted to and help women get EQUAL (ya'lls favorite word) SENTENCES as men do the same way a man that molested a 13 year old girl would.
I think you didn't grasp what I was saying. Clearly this woman is disgusting and deserves more time time in prison.
Yes, there are double standards. And It's ok. Because the society is looking at those situations differently. Because there is a difference who is penetrating who.
Why?
Oh RIGHT.
Because MEN make the rules and MEN say its okay for a young boy to have sex with an adult woman but NOT ok for an adult man to have sex with a young girl of the same age as the aformentioned boy or for two gay males of differing ages to have sex with each other.
Why are you telling other people how to think and feel?
You do realize that the age of consent was as low as 10 only a century ago? How does something go from being acceptable to "demented" in such a short time frame? Evolution doesn't work that fast.
Lots of people still say homosexuality is demented. It seems like we can't agree on what is or isn't.
Yes and a century ago many 10 year olds were supporting families and not going to school. Just because something used to be done doesn't make it right. Women were also forced to orgasm by quack doctors due to "hysteria." Is that okay too because it used to happen?
Are you really arguing a ten year old can fully consent to sexual activity understanding all of the ramifications of the act? I mean...really?
And no, I'm still not going off to look for information for you because anyone who knows anything about child psychology and the way the brain matures should know this is wrong.
Also, don't compare homosexuality - an act between two consenting, legal adults - to this disgusting mess of a thread.
The people I've talked to who grew up in the 50s, 60s or 70s say that it was quite common for teachers at their high school to be screwing students. Honestly, I think our society has become too uptight about this kind of stuff.
I grew up in the 80s and 90s. It happened then too. I don't think its uptight to think teachers should keep their ****ing hands and other body parts away from students.
believe or not, it is by no means symetrical and shouldn't be considered so.
The trauma on a 13 year old girl and that on a 13 year old boy is completely different. In fact, there is a good chance there is no trauma on the boy whatsoever. He might boast about it in a few years to everyone.
no it is not fair, but that's reality.
More bull**** being spewed about women and sexuality.
Did you even read the link?
During academic conferences for the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law and International Association for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders, symbolic votes were taken regarding whether the DSM-5 should include pedohebephilia, and in both cases an overwhelming majority voted against this.[31]
About 11-14 (pubescent) police is not fine, but psychiatrists are generally ok.
Did you know that the police in California is not fine even with 18 and 17.5 having sex? Not everything that police is not ok is pervert and sick.
Did you even read the link?
During academic conferences for the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law and International Association for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders, symbolic votes were taken regarding whether the DSM-5 should include pedohebephilia, and in both cases an overwhelming majority voted against this.[31]
About 11-14 (pubescent) police is not fine, but psychiatrists are generally ok.
Did you know that the police in California is not fine even with 18 and 17.5 having sex? Not everything that police is not ok is pervert and sick.
Quote the whole thing:
Quote:
In a letter to the editor, clinical psychologist Joseph Plaud criticized the study for lacking control groups for post-pubescent and normal patterns of male sexual arousal, overlap between groups Blanchard believed were separate, and lack of specificity in the data.[32] Blanchard replied that the initial publication used sex offenders who had committed crimes against post-pubescent adults as a control group, and that the results supported victim age preferences being a continuous rather than categorical variable.[33] In separate letters to the editor, forensic psychologist Gregory DeClue and mathematician Philip Tromovitch agreed the term would be valuable for research purposes and to subdivide the current diagnosis of pedophilia into victim age preferences, but expressed concern that the term's potential to dramatically expand the number of people diagnosed with a paraphilia without an adequate research base to support it and the article did not include a definition of "mental disorder" and thus lacking the ability to distinguish the pathological from the non-pathological.[34][35] Blanchard stated in a reply that his paper was written under the assumptions that the DSM-5's definition of mental disorder and pathologizing of sexual activity with underaged individuals would be similar to the one found in DSM-IV.[33]
We aren't discussing sexual relationships between older teens/near adults. We are discussing a nearly 50 year old person engaging in sex with a child who has just begun puberty.
Because MEN make the rules and MEN say its okay for a young boy to have sex with an adult woman but NOT ok for an adult man to have sex with a young girl of the same age as the aformentioned boy or for two gay males of differing ages to have sex with each other.
Why are you telling other people how to think and feel?
No.
I just explaining the reality. It is what it is. Do you want to change human nature of thousands years? Go for it.
Mash and Gunion Powder, are you both from another country originally? And living in the U.S. now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
Sound like absolutist subset of libertarians to me, surprised they haven't brought up 'shunning'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPowering1
...One is foreign from God knows where and the other is just trying to justify his preference.
Hey, don't be surprised you're getting this reaction here. You'd get it anywhere other than maybe pedophilia.com.
I'm not surprised by the reasonable reactions here, I'd applaud many of them. The libertarian stances taken here in this thread are not reasonable. They're used to explain or justify or legitimize other backward views as well. It makes sense to counter with rational arguments but often doesn't persuade those with an almost religious zeal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
