|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
I have a complex question about sexual abuse, as it is termed today. Actually the question is about the result of perceptions by others, of sexual abuse.
First I want totally to condemn adult/child sexual acts under all circumstances where the child is coerced, forced, intimidated, blackmailed or otherwise induced against his or her will into a sexual act. Those are not the subject I want to discuss in this thread. Those we have discussed to death before. Equally we have discussed to death the concept that the adult is always at fault, and we have talked about the person who bears the responsibility to say "no" as always being the adult. So let us take that as read, please,
What I want to discuss is different.
I want to look at the guilt the child receives from other people, even when the relationship has been just that: a relationship. And even when only good was done to both parties.
I have long suspected that a child who was part of such a relationship only feels guilt when told to, instructed to, by the media, that searches nowadays for an ogre to blame for everything, almost as a part of the culture of litigation.
The question, really, is "Should a child who has been loved, felt loved, and returned love in a truly two way supportive relationship, be made to feel guilty because they loved an older person?"
I am not sure I've asked it very well.
PLEASE don’t get into a great rant about adult/child sex. Instead please look at the topic I am posing. I see it as a very different issue, the issue of guilt and received guilt from media activity.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The younger person shouldn't feel guilty if this was, once again, a loving, mutual relationship between an older and younger male. Love is love. Love has no boundaries. If a younger person and older person fall in love, it must be meant to be.
Differences in age are like differences in race or gender or whatnot...it's merely physical. If there is love between two people, it doesn't matter who they are.
-Tom 
"Whatever is sought for can be caught, you know,
whatever is neglected slips away."
Oedipus Rex, lines 126-127
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plug
|
 |
Getting started |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 12
|
|
|
To me, the answer to your question is emphatically no. Sure, there may be cases where guilt may be in order. But not at all necessarily. I knew a boy at school who had had been in a relationship with an older person, for about a year. He had been 12, I think, and the other about 19. It had ended when one of them moved away. He said it had been the best time of his life, and he'd been hoping for, looking for, something similar ever since, without finding it. He obviously felt no guilt at all. Quite the opposite.
I've never had that love. But I'm entirely with him. Lucky him. Why SHOULD he feel guilty about something that's so obviously good for those involved? For heaven's sake, we need all the love we can get, especially at that sort of age. And to give all the love we can. The media just get paranoid about paedophilia. I'm sure alot of so-called paedophiles, maybe most, exploit without love. But not all.
Trouble is, how should society distinguish between the bad and the good? There have to be laws to prevent exploitation. But how can law define love? And how do you fix age limits? I mean, surely it's ALWAYS wrong for an adult to have a sexual relationship with a 5 year old, with or without love and comprehension (impossible at that age anyway?). We (the "enlightened") might see it as morally OK with this 11y/o but not with that 13y/o, because one's capable of understanding fully but the other isn't. Sorry, confused, but hope you see what I mean.
Dunno the answers to those. Probably there aren't any. But I'm sure of the answer to your question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
This is exaclty what I am driving at. I feel this is an important issue that can be driven off the agenda by political correctness.
Let me give an example from my own experience, where someone came to me too late for me to be of any practical help. I will start by saying that as the older person what he did was illegal in today's climate, and "unwise" in less politically correct times.
At the age of 22 or so "older" took photographs of "younger" naked. I mean younger was naked. It was a game. I know it was a game because older suffers form what might be called retarded sexuality. He is a little kid in a 22 year old body sexually, though his body and intellect is otherwise that of a full grown 22 year old adult. In other words he is "Emotionally fixed" at a lower sexual age than his body.
What I do not want to get into over this is a "YES he was SO WRONG" debate. He was wrong. He committed an illegal act. He was sentenced by the courts for it. In today's climate it is expected that men who take photographs of naked children go the same route. I am sorry for older, since he was simply stupid and playing kids games with a kid. He is not, and will not be, a dangerous paedophile. He's just silly. And now on the sexual offenders register.
What concerns him and concerns me, is younger. They were great pals. They loved each other as cousins, and genuinely mucked about together. Younger changed school and had worries abou the school change and all the things any ten/eleven year old kid worries about. Mother probed and out with all the rest came the picture taking incident. I have no knowledge of whether younger was worried about the pictures, but i do know that Gary Glitter etc was in the news, and so I postulate that a certain amount of "received guilt" ("I should feel guilty, because it must have been wrong") was present.
Older was reported to the police and prosecuted. Younger had to testify against the guy he was pals with. Older is concenred that younger now feels two guilts:- that of the person who was technically abised by having naked pictures taken
- that of the perons who has had to be a witness when he si unsure that the offence was an offence
This comes back to my original pondering about received guilt.
Tom and Plug and I share a view that a truly willing younger person should feel no guilt. The law is unambiguous over the facts of older's guilt, and must be obeyed. I am in no doubt that the law must be obeyed either.
So, how is "younger" here to be protected from feeling very peculiar about "older's" acts with him, and about older's incarceration as punishment? And if younger is damaged psychologically over this, how could and should that be minimised?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plug
|
|
Getting started |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 12
|
|
|
OK, unwise, illegal, though not in my view morally WRONG. I think a wise parent would not have reported it. But start from the point where older IS reported. Normally, almost inevitably, things will go they way they did go. Prosecution, unwilling evidence, conviction, feeling of guilt on both sides. For older, probably inevitable and, though his act wasn't necessarily wrong, maybe justified in that he WAS silly.
For younger, I think the only way out is a wise counseller who tries to persuade him, as early as possible, that it wasn't so bad after all. That it could have been much "worse". That he needn't feel guilty, even though the prosecution will force him to tell what actually happened. That though it was legally wrong, it wasn't necessarily morally wrong. A tall order, I know. Crying for the moon perhaps. It's only human to feel guilt if your pal ends up in gaol for something you did together. But it's theoretically possible.
I think PC-ness can be a pitfall. Sometimes it's fine, but it can go too far. I'm happy to be non-PC where it seems right. Just as I would be happy to break the law in the right circumstances, as I see them. Maybe that makes me "silly" like the older one here. But where moral judgments clash with the law, I'd feel happier following my judgment. You say the law has to be obeyed. Does it? Maybe I'd regret my judgment when I ended up behind bars - I'm sure I would if it was merely a matter of taking those photos. But maybe I wouldn't: not if it was a matter of a relationship which was GOOD for both parties. I'd feel then like a victim of society and PC-ness. And that's what (in those circumstances) the younger should be told too - that they're BOTH victims, and neither is guilty (except of being caught).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plug
|
|
Getting started |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 12
|
|
|
I said "I'd be happy to break the law in the right circumstances". Suppose I really mean "I like think I'd be happy to". I've never been in that position. If it came to the crunch I'd probably chicken out. Not always easy to put principles into practice
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
The risk of getting caught (and the punishment) versus the reward is the balance. Unless, of course, it is a speeding ticket.
For true love I would risk a great deal, but not if it hurt the one I loved.
There was a well known nude gay pinup, "Jesse Dumanch". An American kid. The man who photographed him (We do seem to be back to pics) and he were outed. Pics of Jesse appeared in his school. They were separated and the man imprisoned. One oculd argue that pics that appear on the net are an invasion of privacy when nude. Or otherwise. But in this case that is why the pics were taken. By willing participants having fun.
I am now rambling. There was a point, but it escapes me.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
e
|
 |
On fire! |
Location: currently So Cal
Registered: May 2002
Messages: 1179
|
|
|
Love is an emotion. It's a feeling. What you are asking about is action. It is what we do with what we feel.
A father loves his son. He wants his son to be happy. He then spends time with his son. He does things that he thinks will make his son happy. He takes him camping, fishing, swimming, teaches him to play baseball, etc. He has sex with his son. Is having sex with his son different than camping or fishing? That is what you are asking. Does sex have a special meaning attached to it that makes it different than other types of activities or not?
Society teaches us that sex is different. Society has attached certain taboos around sexual activity. Having sex within the family and having sex with children are two of those taboos. Should the child feel guilty. My answer is no. It is the adult in the relationship who is responsible for the actions. The adult should bear whatever guilt there is.
It is true that children frequently do feel guilt over such sexual activities. This is largely due to the reactions of those around him. Parents, friends, teachers, clergy, police, and even the perpetrator, often say and do things to make the child feel guilty and responsible in some way. Most of the time it is because they are angry or upset and don't realize what they are doing. Sometimes it is pure ignorance. Sometimes they would rather blame the child and it is intentional. Regardless, it is very important that SOMEONE help the child realize that this was not their fault.
A child (or any victim) does not have to feel guilt. I don't believe there is any internal mechanism inside us that makes us feel guilty for sexual behavior or any other behavior unless we are taught to feel guilty. We don't feel guilty if we play baseball or go fishing because we are not taught to feel guilty for doing those things. If we lived in a society where murder, or rape, or torture is perfectly acceptable, we would not feel guilty if we murdered, raped, or tortured. I also believe that if we lived in a society that believed sex with children is acceptable, no one would feel guilty for doing so.
The fact is that society has deemed this to be an unacceptable behavior and as with any such behavior there is a certain amount of guilt that is associated with it. How much guilt a victim feels is going to depend on a great many factors. The effect that guilt has on the child's life is also going to depend largely upon the reactions of the other adults in that child's life.
Personally I don't believe that any act is, in and of itself, right or wrong. We define right and wrong, moral and immoral. Society as a whole frequently assists us in those definitions. Our own feelings regarding being a part of any particular act is usually set by those definitions.
Think good thoughts,
e
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I may quote the question:
"Should a child who has been loved, felt loved, and returned love in a truly two way supportive relationship, be made to feel guilty because they loved an older person?"
So, truly, there is love involved here. However, it's not the same as father-son love, I would assume. Just because people are having sex (and even though the question doesn't explicitly mention sex) doesn't mean they aren't in love. Perhaps there are different degrees of love?
I definitely we're referring to more than just sex here. This is a loving, mutual relationship. So, I think that as much as it is the adult's responsibility, it is perhaps the child's responsibility, as well. But I agree with everything else you're saying, especially societal morals and the like.
However, perhaps this is my teenage innocence talking.  But, we seem to have a descrepancy here about love. There seems to be a difference between "father-son" (or "mother-daughter", for that matter) and "sexual relations" love. Are there different "degrees" or "stages" of love?
-Tom
"Whatever is sought for can be caught, you know,
whatever is neglected slips away."
Oedipus Rex, lines 126-127
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plug
|
|
Getting started |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 12
|
|
|
And in a totally different society there might be no hang-ups about it. But to keep the debate within practical limits shouldn't we restrict it to our own society, or what our own society might be with quite minor changes?
Seems to me society (western society, anyway) takes the line it does for historical and religious reasons. And that line is for the most part changing. For the most part for the better. But it still sees danger in adult-child sex. Because children are more vulnerable than adults. Everyone here, surely, brought up in much the same culture, condemns sexual abuse (in the literal sense) of children. And physical abuse of children in care or foster homes, or even their own home. Rightly so.
We condemn all this because the victim doesn't consent, just as we condemn murder or rape or torture because the victim doesn't consent. Isn't that the basic rule behind our standards (or oughtn't it to be)? Do unto others ... We tend to approve of camping and swimming and fishing and baseball for two reasons. Because they have other virtues - teamwork, exercise etc. And because they're basically consensual activities that aren't so easily misused (OK, other things can go on in camps, but that's beside the point. And OK, the victims of fishing and hunting don't consent, but that's another issue too).
But sex as an activity, especially with children, is so easily misused. I reckon whether it's morally right or wrong depends on two things. Certainly on the presence or absence of informed consent. That's what UK legislators are currently struggling with in trying to define adult rape. Where children are involved, even bigger questions come up about what "informed" means, and at what age it's possible.
The other thing is love. You're rational, e, and may call me soppy and sentimental for saying this. But I think that adult-child sex without love, just for experiment or physical pleasure, even if the consent is there, is abuse. You'll come back and ask why adult-adult sex for the same reasons isn't abuse too, and I can't fully answer that. But to come back to the point, if adult-child sex is an action resulting from love and is accompanied by informed consent, OK by me. Even though informed consent is difficult to define, and love impossible. And yes, a father having sex with his son is different than fishing because in OUR society it has so many more implications. It demands a quite different level of informed consent.
Dang this board. It's kept me up far too late and I've got to get up early tomorrow. No, today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
e
|
|
On fire! |
Location: currently So Cal
Registered: May 2002
Messages: 1179
|
|
|
Certainly there are degrees of love. The Greeks had words for at least three. Agape - devine love, Eros - physical love, and phileo - affection. There are most certainly more "stages" of love. I used father-son in my example, but it could have been any meaningful relationship between an older man and a boy. My point was not to get into a discussion on the degrees of love, but to comment on the actions that accompany it. Love clearly does not have to include sex or sexual desire.
Timmy commented about a 20-something man photographing a boy in the nude. He questioned whether this could be a "loving" relationship in which the boy would not have to feel guilt. In my reply I tried to differentiate between the feeling or emotion and the action that accompanied that feeling. I focused on the sexual aspect of the relationship because that seemed more relevant to timmy's question.
Think good thoughts,
e
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
e
|
|
On fire! |
Location: currently So Cal
Registered: May 2002
Messages: 1179
|
|
|
First, sex should be consensual in any relationship. If it isn't then there's something wrong. At least that's my opinion.
I brought up these other "activities" as examples of things two people in a relationship can do together that aren't controversial for the very purpose of demonstrating that a loving, caring relationship can exist between an adult and a child that does not contain sex. Secondly, I brought it up to illustrate that we do place a different meaning on sex than on other types of activity.
It is also possible to abuse these other activities. Some fathers force their sons to play sports. The father tends to live vicariously through the son. The son participates reluctantly (may even appear willing), but hates the sport and is only doing it to please his father. The father loves the son but is unwittingly forcing him into an activity he hates. The son loves his father and pretends to enjoy the activity.
I won't question why consensual adult-adult sex without love is ok. IMHO it is ok BECAUSE it is between two adults. Adults are (or should be) capable of giving consent. Unless a person suffers from some sort of disorder, adults are capable of understanding the consequences of their actions and therefore capable of giving consent.
This is not the case where children are concerned. Children are not miniature adults. They simply don't have the cognative ability that adults have. They are incapable of understanding the consequences of their actions to a large degree. Therefore they are incapable of giving informed consent. So IMHO, even if a child is willing to particiapte in a sexual act, it is not ok.
What makes the issue difficult is that there is no particular age at which a child suddenly becomes capable of understanding and therefore giving consent. This usually begins to occur in the early to mid teens, but varies greatly from child to child. Because children mature at different rates, it is possible that a 14 year old may be mature enough to give informed consent while a particular 16 year old may not. This is why society sets age limits. It is easy to look at a person's age. It is not easy to determine whether that person is capable of giving consent.
Here in the US there are several ages of consent. A person can obtain a drivers license at 16, vote and be held responsible (as adults) for their actions at 18, but may not consume alcohol until 21.
Sorry timmy, I know this is getting away from your question about guilt. But I think issues such as consent, age, and morality are all factors that lead directly into our response to adult-child sex and therefore are directly related to the "guilt" that a child can be made to feel. Initially I tried to steer clear of such discussion, but as we have progressed, it seemed necessary.
Think good thoughts,
e
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
We now have several areas. We are forgetting something, though. Not all children and not all adults areintelligent. So let;s deal froo the moment with the section of children and adulst that possess intelligence. Sufficient intelligence to make an assessment of the action as a child that engages in acts that are both loving and sexual.
Please do note: I am not talking about any act that makes the child uncomfortable, either physically or emotionally. I am not going to define these, nor the gender, but I am going to suggest that the expereince of loving and being loved is a truly mutual thing, and involves sexual activity. And I am necessarily speaking of a truly loving and caring adult, too.
I am not seeking to justify a relationship between age groups where it is illegal to have sexual relations. I am looking solely at guilt that is (or may be) visited on the child for mutually enjoyable and (in their particular case) sustaining emotions and actvities.
There must, for example, have been cases in children's homes, where the older person did not abuse, but loved, provided love and was loved in return. OK, a very contentious scenario, because of the "in loco parentis" aspects. But, when later the court case hit the fan, who comforts the child who was loved,truly loved, and who returned that love, and did not feelanything except love untilasked by the authorities tobe a witness for th eprosecution?
Again, do note that I am not seeking to excuse breaches of the law, or breaches of trust.
I know a father whose son died in an accident when he was 17. The father lost not only his son but his lover. Because the son is dead we will never know what was in his mind, but should he have felt guilty about it, had the affair come to light?
A young acquaintance was jailed because he had an affair with a younger party. The older was 22, the younger 14. It was an affair, with youthful passions. We cannto ask the younger how he feels because the older has been prohibited from making any contact until the younger turns 18. It was society that mounted the proscution to protect the younger. But how much protection was given? How much guilt and fear was created?
Again I am looking not at the law and the consent we give to be governed by it, but at the consequences to the person protected of the emotional grief that their apparent protection brings. I am not arguing to abolish the laws. I want to know, in a practical way, how to aid with the grief and guilt that those laws sometimes (often?) produce.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
e
|
|
On fire! |
Location: currently So Cal
Registered: May 2002
Messages: 1179
|
|
|
I'll return to the guilt when I come home from work. I don't really have time as I am about to leave. But first let me ask a question. If the adult does understand the consequences of his actions and the devestation they can cause to the child (if discovered), is the act of having sex with a child truly a loving and caring act?
Think good thoughts,
e
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
The point is, I think, if the relationship IS loving, no-one expects to be discovered, for there is no thought of discovery. I do want to avoid, herem the adult's responsibility. To me it is a totally different and valid issue, and one we've covered before.
I want to stay totally in the realm of the child, and the difficult feelings that an accidental discovery by the "wrong" person would bring.
I have long wondered about the true harm done by such a relationship. By this I mean the harm done without media influence. My query becomes "is there any harm done?"
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 2344
|
|
|
A child can love a puppy, mommy and daddy, and gramma and grampa.
A child is not equipt physically, mentally nor psychologically to understand carnal love.
Therefore, when it does occur it is a game.
A forbidden game.
Such forbiddance to a child indicates that it is a bad thing because "mommy and daddy must not know about what happened".
Therefore the child WILL FEEL GUILTY.
Now, can you all please just leave the little children to their toys and their puppy dogs and their little friends and keep them out of the bedroom!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
Thank you for your rant. You have missed the point totally, of course. But that is posisbly because oyu have preconceived ideas.
We are not talking about forbidden games here. Or I am not.
It's your opinion, I suppose, but you have neither expressed it with courtesy nor care. Epxressions in that manner are not welcome here. Say things better and you remain welcome. Your choice. Shape up or ship out.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 2344
|
|
|
No Message Body
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The law makes everything perfectly clear that if sexual activity or sexual appearing activity ocurrs between and adult and a minor then it is criminal, and guilt must be assigned. The law goes on to state that the adult must assume the mantle of guilt. However, if the activity is mutually consensual then morally guilt must be shared. Which leads into many grey areas, including "informed consent".
However, that does not answer timmy's question, i.e. is guilt placed on the child, and if so, what can be done to assuage that guilt. Refering back to what I said above, yes, guilt is placed on the child (not saying justified or unjustified). At the very least, the child will feel guilt in contributing to whatever punishment that is meted out to his lover. Part two of the question is much harder, and may have no answer. Counselling is effective in cases of abuse since it is somewhat simple (simple concept, not simple action) to reinforce the idea that the child is a victim, and had no control over the situation. But when the actions were mutual, or when the child feels he initiated the criminal acts, trying to convince the child they were a victim could lead to altered concepts of love, both physical and emotional. How can you tell a child his love is wrong just because he loved an adult? Do you really want to do that?
Sorry, I do not have an answer. And I have not read any case history or research where this concept has been fully explored and a conclusion reached. All that I have read relies on child victimization. Hopefully, someone with more experience and learning in psychology and counselling techniques can shed more light, or at least point us in the right direction.
I know, I know. More questions than answers. But can this question truly have a correct answer?
Hugs, Charlie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
e
|
|
On fire! |
Location: currently So Cal
Registered: May 2002
Messages: 1179
|
|
|
is something that is nearly impossible. The actions of the child, the adult, and whoever discovers the activity and later becomes involved are all intertwined.
In my first post I believe I stated that the child does not have to feel guilt. There is nothing in the act of sex that will inately cause a person to feel guilty. The reason guilt is felt is a result of what the child has been or will be taught about the act. It is also a result of what the child knows and is told about other consequences of the act such as the adult going to jail. The way it is handled by the adult and everyone else involved will play a large part about whether a child feels guilty.
Treatment of a child who has been abused (I still consider that this is abuse regardless of the adult's motives) is a complex issue. The entire relationship should be discussed freely and openly with the child by a person capable of understanding the issue from the child's point of view. Trained professionals are (though not always) the best equipped to handle this. The exact things to be discussed and said will vary greatly from case to case. There is no one pat answer or simple formula that will prevent or alleviate guilt or other associated feelings.
I raised my question aout the adult in that earlier post to help illustrate my belief that in todays society, a sexual act committed by an adult with a child cannot be completly loving and caring. Every adult should understand that today there is a very high probability that the sexual relationship will be discovered, and that when discovered, the child will be caused to suffer. Therefore any adult who commits such an act is placing that child at risk of harm.
Children often have sexual feelings, however they very rarely (without adult influence) will commit (or have a need to commit) an adult style sexual act. In all but rare cases, it is the adult who feels the need to express love in a sexual manner. Such acts are not satisfying a need of the child's, but of the adult. This is another reason that adult-child sexual relationships are not loving and mutual, even if the child is taught to enjoy it.
Think good thoughts,
e
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
e
|
|
On fire! |
Location: currently So Cal
Registered: May 2002
Messages: 1179
|
|
|
Your point is at least somewhat valid. Simply tone down the response and return to the discussion. timmy and I are obviously disagreeing, but we are being quite civil and polite about it.
Think good thoughts,
e
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
|
 |
Really getting into it |
Registered: November 2002
Messages: 732
|
|
|
I've been thinking about this since timmy posted it and have had thoughts all over the map. Like e, I have issues with the possibility of the premise as defined. Like the "former child" I am finding this tough to discuss rationally.
Nonetheless, I've been trying to think of ANY case when a child SHOULD feel guilt over sex. The only cases I can think of would be if he somehow coerced or forced another into the act. In the case of an adult, this would have to be someone significantly inferior or incapacitated, mentally or physically. In those cases, the child has probably learned the behavior from someone his mental and/or physical superior, in which case he should be given some leeway, or give himself some leeway as the case may be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
This question has been perplexing me since I met for the first time people who had been abused. I had deeply emotionmal reactions. I still do.
Then I met a very few people who had been totally fulfilled by thyer love as a child of an older person as an adult. Please do note that I am not qualifying ages here. Probably I am using the law's definition of a minor (UK - under age of sexual consent, as far as this discussion is concerned). I am also stating very clearly a respect for the law, and an understanding that, ipso facto, the adult always takes the blame even if the liaison was consensual.
I found that my thinking altered when I met the people who had been and still are being fulfilled by their relationships. And I became confused over what my reaction "should be". You see I watch TV and read newspapers, and I see the irrational persecution of relationships alongside the rational prosecution of abusers.
I certainly don't expect us to reach an agreement here. But I do see us thinking about what society tells us is unthinkable because of today's prurient interest in all our lives. The post about Michael Jackson was highly relevant, too, by the way.
The thing that impresses me is that, with one exception, we have been and are able to look at this issue with coherent thought, expressed rationally even when we are emotionally entangled in everything we each have as history.
No-one has said "It is right for a child and an adult to have a full loving and physical relationship". What we have done is accepted that a very few of such realtionships are real, and are mutually nurturing, even when they are outside our perosnal experience. Then we are thinking about what our rreaction might be after careful thought.
We have also managed to set aside from this thread our natural loathing of any act that harms, let alone the law's correct attitude towards it
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 2344
|
|
|
Maybe its because I'm still a teen myself, but from my experience these so-called "children" are often more than well equip to deal with their own feelings are realise the consequences involved. I guess however, society feels the need to cater for people of all maturation levels, so while some "children" may be ready to deal with a fully adult-level relationship others may not be. It is a pity that society has to set laws that apply to everyone instead of being able to take things on a case-by-case basis.
Now, think about a situation where an "adult" and a "child" (by legal definitions) are good friends. The child, being quite mature for their age, realises that they feel a certain love for this adult and wish to act upon it. So the friendship grows into something more, even though the adult realises the legal implications of such a relationship and is wary about letting things go too far. Then, one day, after a lengthy courting period the child decides he wishes to do something of a sexual nature with the adult. What then becomes the adults responsibility? In a legal sense? What about a moral sense?
Legally I guess the adult should say "no" and continue to say no until the "child" is old enough to satisfy the local laws. Morally, I believe the adult has a certain responsibility to ensure the childs safety, for both now and the future. They should explain to the child the consequences of the situation for both the adult and child and ensure that it is something the child really wants to do. I believe, from a moralistic standpoint, rather than legal, if the child is fully educated on the circumstances, is able to demonstrate to the adult that they are mature enough for sex and mostly importantly if the child thinks of the idea themselves without being coerced into it by the adult and if the adult makes every effort to disuade them, in such a situation, I believe sex would be morally "right".
However, going back to the original question of guilt, in such a situation as the one I suggested, I'm inclined to think that a child would feel MORE guilt, shame and pain should the relationship be found out than if it had been the "adults fault". Why then is there such disparity between what "feels morally right" and the guilt generated on account of the laws and pressures of society in general? Perhaps my sense of morals is "wrong", or perhaps I have a more utopian outlook than society in general, but to me a society that causes the innocent to feel guilty and the loving to be put in the same category as those who intend on causing harm really needs to take a step back and re-evaluate itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
robert bryce
|
|
Really getting into it |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 414
|
|
|
very respectfully it is my opinion that the leagle age for male homosexual consent be lowered to age 12 and that adult involvement be punishes with the severest penalties including PHYSICAL castration.The minimum age on adults should be 99 years old. just joking guy. You do make some good points though... robert
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
|
|
Really getting into it |
Registered: November 2002
Messages: 732
|
|
|
No Message Body
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
robert bryce
|
|
Really getting into it |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 414
|
|
|
Hi guys--with all due respect it would seem that the PROBLEM has been beaten to death.Now lets discuss solution! It would seem logical,at least to me,that children at a very young age should be taught about improper sexual touching..I would guess that a lot of parents are ill-equiped or unwilling to address this topic.Its a given that a lot of under 10 yr olds simply do not trust their parents and the blame can be laid directly on the parents doorstep.Kids,especially youngsters keep secrets. Its a game they play well and parents fuel this by their own dysfunction and two-facedness.Smoking is a good example.Parents just say DONT LET ME CATCH YOU..So little sharksnot makes damn sure not to get caught..Of course,the smart little fucker thinks he or she should be rewarded for not engaging in self-destructive behavior and super mom and dad havnt a clue about rewarding good conduct and absolutely have no concept as to how to garner that childs trust...But enough of my rambling..I wish all of you well.. robert
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
robert bryce
|
|
Really getting into it |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 414
|
|
|
THANKS TREVOR I BADLY NEEDED THAT HUG AS TIMMY ZAPPED ME AND TURNED ME INTO A FROG. i dont really know where your from but some of us yanks got enlarged opinions and can get frosty.thats spelled n-a-s-t-y . I sure hope Timmy finds the countermeasure on the frog spell he cast on me--by the way,what ever happened to Marc,I never got an answer. robert
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
|
|
Really getting into it |
Registered: November 2002
Messages: 732
|
|
|
No Message Body
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
|
|
Really getting into it |
Registered: November 2002
Messages: 732
|
|
|
No Message Body
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
This wil be easy to snipe at. Please think instead 
Qualification 
Welcome, robert! 
Frog? Maybe I could play "princess"? 