|
|
brian
|
 |
Toe is in the water |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 60
|
|
|
I discussed age of cosent with a BL friend of mine and the two of us had very different opinions about it. The question he raised was, how come kids aged nine or ten are old enough to be testimonees (sp?) in court when it comes to saying something against their parents and actually to take a stand (they are obviously mature enough to understand that), but 12year olds are supposedly not mature enough to decide whether they want to have sex with someone.
As I said, we discussed the whole AoC thing for a while (it is a big topic over and over again on the BL boards) and yes, this is about the sexual aspect of boylove which also does exist. It is not about going out and raping kids, but about...how come people take the right to decide for kids in aspects of sexuality when th eylet hte kids decide alone in other aspects of life? Where is the difference?: 1. you tell a kid to go to court and say that his mother is drunk of her ass all the time and his daddy is having sex with a different woman every night. the kids testifies that and ends up in some new family. decision for life. 2. you give a kid the chance to decide whether he/she wants to have sex with someone or not. might be decision for life
As I said, that's not my logic applied here. I discussed the issue from another point. But my friend's point was, do adults have the right to make that decsion for kids who are perfectly mature enough when it's about other aspects of life?
thoughts on this?
love,
brian
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Simon
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 92
|
|
|
Well can you say that
a) there is anything like boylove? *looks at Tim and knows that that is an old topic* the more I learn the more it is hmm a form of use...maybe abuse of kids who believe that they are mature but are not.
b) th eissue of age of consent is in my point of view perfectly OK when you have teenagers amongst themselves. So why not permit them to be with their kind. 12 would be a good age of consent with the spacial that sexual contact would just be possible and legal with kids in a certain age group lets say +- 2 years, 3 years or so. So abuse coudl be minimized.
well that is the two cents of some all time critic ;o)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No Message Body
"Always forgive your enemies...nothing annoys them quite so much." Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tim
|
 |
Really getting into it |
Location: UK, West of London in Ber...
Registered: February 2002
Messages: 842
|
|
|
Your logic is impeccable. Get either element wrong and it is life destroying.
But get sex wrong and it tears your body emotionally and physically.
I am content with the laws as they stand to protect children from random predatory adults, and didliek the laws that affect children during divorces. I truly do not believe that a child (which I define here to be one where no pubertal changes have started) is capable of understandingthe emotional and physical consequences of sex. I argue the SAME about choosing where to live by the way
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(made you kook, hehe) 14. In keeping with Tim's POV most boys have started puberty at that time.
But my question is: Does puberty make you smarter or more mature? Given the antics of some I have seen I think not. Plus the hormones are raging at that time, so if he shows an interest, keep your back to the wall, hehe.
To me, Age of Consent is like trying to set an arbitrary age for any human behavior. It really cannot be done fairly, as everyone matures at a different rate of speed. One country says 14, another says 18, one state says 15, another 17. Should there be a shopping list for favorable locations to suit your point of view?
And age difference (another argument that is always reared) what is the difference between 12/14, 14/18, 17/22, 19/37?
MHO
Hugs, Charlie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
 |
On fire! |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 2344
|
|
|
Part of your question, I think, is easy to answer. A 9 or 10 year old child can sometimes be trusted to testify, but not always. Our legal system tries to avoid child witnesses except when absolutely necessary. The reason a 9 or 10 year old child can't make a decision about sex is because he is a child, and must still rely on adults to make decisions for him. As a parent I can tell you that if you put a bowl of fruit and a bowl of candy in front of a 9 or 10 year old kid and let him choose what to eat, the fruit will go stale and the candy will need to be refilled. That's why pre-adolescents have their menu chosen by their parents, and hopefully the parents are responsible.
Adolescence is a different matter. Some kids can handle it, some not AND THERE IS NO WAY TO TELL, REALLY. So if you are a pedophile, you don't care about the kid, you are just a sick control freak. If you are a user, (that is a user of people) all you care about is satisfying your own lust. You will use people all your life and cast them away when you're satiated so you don't care if it is a kid or not. If you are a true boy lover, and you care more about the boy than yourself, logic,emotion and decency will tell you to lay off the sex until the kid is a young man and has the emotional maturity to handle it. But believe me, the kid will want to eat from that bowl of candy, The question is, as a boylover, are you mature and responsible enough to make him eat the fruit?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
|
|
Really getting into it |
Registered: November 2002
Messages: 732
|
|
|
I like the analogy, but first I want to point out the difficulties with the comparison.
Witnesses are supposed to (usually) relate facts only - what they've seen or heard, sometimes what they feel. They are usually nitpicked about any inconsistent details by the cross-examination, testimony is compared with other facts, and the judge prevents badgering and leading of witnesses (sorry, this from my US perspective, but I think most English-speaking countries have similar court proceedings.)
Decisions are not made and opinions are not usually given, except by "expert witnesses."
Child witnesses are always suspect and highly scrutinized because they can be coached and can't judge whether it's more important to make mom happy or tell the truth, from your example.
Okay, all that aside, I think an adult having "consensual" sex with a young person, say under about 14-16, is much more like a person with no legal expertise defending himself in court for a major offense without a lawyer or money.
The prosecution has so many more resources - expert witnesses to challenge him, experienced lawyers with knowledge of the court system, who can use a witness's own testimony against him by twisting his words or confusing him, phychologists who can read the jury and knows how to play to their emotions, etc.
In a one-on-one sexual encounter, there are no checks and balances like a normal trial, no other witnesses or facts, no judges or juries, just the boy's own experience and wits against the "prosecution."
The adult (prosecution) has the resources (physical comforts, entertainment, drugs/alchohol/bribes), prior knowlege of sex and anatomy, knowledge of emotions/intimidation/blackmail ("I won't be your friend/give you pleasure anymore if you don't try this.") and is experienced at seduction - convincing people or "selling" an idea ("Okay, you liked that, right? Well, this will feel even better!")
My examples are crude and obvious, I would expect more subtlty and even the likelihood that the adult doesn't really believe he is pressuring the younger into anything while he subconsciously is.
Even an older teen is missing many of these resources, let along a young teen or prepubescent.
This is a bit of a tangent, but I've said before that sex is like a drug. Very gratifying, short term. I also think that once you know what you're missing you want more and you don't ever want to go without. Well, at least it was that way for me, both masturbating and later with both foreplay and real sex.
For the adult, he may rationalize or lie to himself like an alchoholic or addict. For the youngster, he may do things he's uncomfortable with or are ultimately unhealthy for the bit of pleasure he gets in return. There's also the companionship and friendship of an adult, which is certainly a morale booster for the child, to know you are important to someone so much more important than yourself, like your adult friend.
Okay, to switch gears again, I personally don't believe that meaningless or promiscuous sex, without commitment or reciprocal love, is emotionally healthy. If YOU do - don't bother reading further.
If you look at the emotional and intellectual relationship between an adult and a child - well, they're at such totally diffent places in their lives they have little in common that would make them true partners in an emotionally healthy relationship. Granted, if you're a teen still in school you would have more in common with a child, but that won't last long until you have adult worries and needs while he continues to be a kid for quite awhile.
Look at how difficult it is for mature, experienced adults with a firm sexual orientation and of the same general age/intelligence/maturity/wisdom/experience to find enough common ground to form meaningful or lasting relationships. Compare that to a semi-formed school child trying to relate to an adult.
I suppose it can rarely happen that they meet enough of each others' needs to have a mostly positive relationship, but that has to been extremely situation, right?
Okay, if I'm all full of shit or even half-full, please post or e-mail me links to where kids are saying how great their relationships with adults are - I really haven't looked for them.
Hey, David from HK - if you've gotten this far (er - congratulations on that feat) and want to give us your insights - I'd really like to hear from you as either a professional, or if you have relevant life experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
|
|
Really getting into it |
Registered: November 2002
Messages: 732
|
|
|
I don't think puberty is a good indicator of consentual maturity. My son started his at 10 but at 11 is still one of the most naive and gullibubble in his class. I would have also said sweet, but only between the tantrums and smart aleck cracks - ah, fun with hormones.
I think an arbitrary age may be the best we have to protect the majority the majority of the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, since you asked...(clears his throat as he steps up to the mike...)
Basically I agree with you. The younger will usually be more impulsive/immediate gratification oriented and not as able to think thru consequences. The older can always take advantage of that if he chooses.
My one proviso to that is that kids above the age of, say, 14 or so, are pretty smart and not so easily manipulated (thank God!) Sometimes the younger (and by younger I never mean younger than mid-teens!) DOES know what he wants and knows the ramifications.
I have worked with gay kids in agencies and in counselling situations, both group and individually, and the range of maturity is as vast as you all have said. That needs to be taken into account as well.
The other thing that I may differ on philosophically with several others here is that I DO believe in the concept of recreational sex (as opposed to sex needing to be a reflection of a loving relationship). Recreational sex is condemned by most religions that I know of (I think) and by many people out of reflex, but never-the-less I think that sometimes sex can just be under-taken for fun.
It has to be the same for both parties, of course, and it has to be truly consentual and safe/protected and all the other usual provisos, but I do believe it's a legitimate reason for sex at times. How many of us have heard (or said), "Marry him/her? Are you kidding? Neither of us want that...it was just for fun!"
I don't know if that last belongs on the thread about adult/youth or BL, maybe should be a separate thread. If so, oh Great Keeper of the Threads, it can be moved! Hehehe
"Always forgive your enemies...nothing annoys them quite so much." Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
|
|
Really getting into it |
Registered: November 2002
Messages: 732
|
|
|
I had never thought of the term "recreational" before. Appropriate, I guess, and in my extremely limited hetro (boo hoo) experience, sex is always comforting and makes me forget my worries for a time.
I guess in retrospect I must have learned that casual sex is wrong. Well, I was actually taught that outside marriage is wrong but have modified that view a bit. I guess if the partners understand and agree, there is nothing inherently wrong or bad with recreational sex - it isn't a "sin" against another person. I now consider myself challenged to broaden my thinking - at least to accept others beliefs or lack thereof.
It very well may be my own predjudice or lacking diversity in my friends, but I can't think of any women I know who would admit to themselves or others that non-loving sex is okay - even those who have many short-term lovers seem to believe it was always love at the time, never just lust and passion. But, I can easily see this happening between two guys - carrying the "wank with a friend" thing to the next level. Maybe just my narrow view?
It's possibly ironic that I just now started reading Lenny's Love From Beyond. I guess I won't know for sure until I finish.
Sorry for the rambling - I'd just never seriously considered this subject before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recreational sex isn't exactly WRONG in my book, but nor is it really right either (these days at least). It feels a bit callous I think, just having it for the sake of the sex itself.
There should be more behind such an intimate experience. But to each his own of course, I'm not out to moralize or judge or condemn. I've had my share of recreational sex too, even though it was a long time ago now.
-Lenny
"But he that hath the steerage of my course,
direct my sail."
-William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, Act One, Scene IV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and as we age, the need to placate that desire diminishes. When done in a safe and responsible manner, recreational sex will satisfy physical cravings, but will not fill that hole in everyones soul of the desire to be loved. And one must never forget the possible consequences of sex, no matter how careful you are.
I think the problem with condoning recreational sex for teenagers is that they still have the belief that they will live forever, it always happens to the other guy. If that hurdle can be overcome, and all teenagers (by the age of 14) can be taught (and comprehend) the realities of sex then society would see a major shift in attitudes and behavior. Also, hopefully, there would be a lot less teenaged pregnancies and unwanted children. Venereal disease would see a healthy downturn. But education is what is needed. Telling a teen not to do something usually has the opposite affect, but that is what society embraces at this time.
Definitely another thread now David. Will the great thread-master loom over us and whack our pee-pees?
Hugs, Charlie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tim
|
|
Really getting into it |
Location: UK, West of London in Ber...
Registered: February 2002
Messages: 842
|
|
|
No Message Body
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Glad you asked! 
Agreed. 
Thanks! 
