Child/Adult Sexual Contact and Evidence

[superluminal]

What about evidence from primitive societies? I seem to remember Margaret Mead did some work among the Samoans where she found that the children transitioned easily from childhood to adolescence ( considered adulthood) due to lack of sexual taboos...

I also have heard of similar studies. Although I'm not 100% convinced, my strong feeling (from being a student of evolutionary biology) is that taboos placed on childhood sexuality are a late invention of humans, by parents, to control access to their shared gene pool.

In many non-human primates, sexual "play" between older and younger members begins almost as soon as the youngster becomes able to physically move away from the parent.

 

[S.A.M.]

I think the taboos are a way of controlling the woman as a resource; you know same as the price of virginity, bride price etc seen in primitive societies.

Its merely one more way the men found to restrict us women from having fun; you might notice the taboos for boys are a lot less ( go forth and multiply?).

 

[superluminal]

I think the taboos are a way of controlling the woman as a resource; you know same as the price of virginity, bride price etc seen in primitive societies.

Its merely one more way the men found to restrict us women from having fun; you might notice the taboos for boys are a lot less ( go forth and multiply?).

Yes. Unfortunately. But modern humans can make the decision to limit or eliminate holdovers like the repression of women. Because we have these super-dooper adaptive brains, we can modify societies to take into account human nature and redirect it instead of repressing it. Sort of like putting a relief valve on a steam boiler instead of just letting the pressure build and watching it blow up every once in a while.

I like that line from the "African Queen" that Catherine Hepburn uses:

"Nature is what we were put on earth to rise above."

 

[MetaKron]

I don't even know where anyone got the idea that sex was harmful for 14 year old people. One of the professors on the web seems clueless to the fact that the idea that it's pedophilia is a very recent one and seems to have come out of nowhere. In fact the idea seems to have sort of worked its way out of Hell without a passport. "Pedophilia" in this case doesn't seem to be linked to any sort of science about the matter. It came from the religious fanatics. It is largely because these religious fanatics were against sexuality of all types and wanted to ban all of it that they could, except for the sex that they couldn't ban, the kind that produced more followers for them to use against the rest of the world. The use of the word "pedophile" to describe someone who has sex with a teenager came from prosecutors who wanted to exploit the political atmosphere.

The accusation of pedophilia is used to intimidate anyone who has read the scientific material on the subject, to prevent them from being heard. It is a deliberate lie used to intimidate people, even to destroy their careers if they happen to have scientific credibility as professors of universities. It is also a very convenient tool to use to selectively destroy the careers of anyone who might tell uncomfortable truths.

 

[superluminal]

I don't even know where anyone got the idea that sex was harmful for 14 year old people. One of the professors on the web seems clueless to the fact that the idea that it's pedophilia is a very recent one and seems to have come out of nowhere. In fact the idea seems to have sort of worked its way out of Hell without a passport. "Pedophilia" in this case doesn't seem to be linked to any sort of science about the matter. It came from the religious fanatics. It is largely because these religious fanatics were against sexuality of all types and wanted to ban all of it that they could, except for the sex that they couldn't ban, the kind that produced more followers for them to use against the rest of the world. The use of the word "pedophile" to describe someone who has sex with a teenager came from prosecutors who wanted to exploit the political atmosphere.

The accusation of pedophilia is used to intimidate anyone who has read the scientific material on the subject, to prevent them from being heard. It is a deliberate lie used to intimidate people, even to destroy their careers if they happen to have scientific credibility as professors of universities. It is also a very convenient tool to use to selectively destroy the careers of anyone who might tell uncomfortable truths.

Without thinking too deeply about it, I agree. It's the same in some other fields of research too. Did you know that many a researcher in sociobiology and genetic behaviorism was accused of promoting genocide and racism simply because they discovered, via valid research, that many human behaviors are genetically linked? What a world. Well, it's nothing new. Pedophile, witch, heathen, heretic... Give it a nice inflammatory label and you can pretty much push any agenda you want. In fairness though, I think pedophilia denotes sexual attraction to young folks of non-childbearing age. Yes? For others, it's "just" statutory rape, consensual or not. As if 14yr olds don't have a well defined sense of their own desires. Bah.

 

[MetaKron]

This is why I have a problem with the way they do things. They think they are doing something right by demonizing pedophiles. The trouble is, demonization is a package. Make them demons and we give them unnatural powers over us, the power to make us behave irrationally and violently.

 

[nubianconcubine]

i still feel that sex between a very young child (waaay prepubescent) and an older person (20's and up) is wrong.
however, you're right. the only cases you ever hear about are the bad ones where the children are forced into it. who knows what would happen if the child was willing. those are the cases no one knows about because there was never a problem with it.
i read a book on molestation (sorry don't have the title) about a girl (about 14) who was having a sexual oriented relationship with her uncle. nothing was ever forced and no actual intercourse took place. but the girl actually begged her uncle to go ahead and finish the act. he wouldn't do it, though, because he wanted her "real" first time to be with a boy she loved. she tried to make him understand that she loved him...

now. does this count as a damaging sort of relationship despite the fact that she wanted it as much as he obviously did? she claimed to love him and wanted him but, ulitimately, would not be able to have him. not just because of societal taboos. direct relatives breed genetic defects. that is why incest is considered a taboo.

 

[perplexity]

In my experience people sexually frustrated are more damaged and damaging than those fulfilled, but it is futile to postulate a particular event as meaningful, without the context, the relationship, the parents, the social expectation, the conditioning.

--- Ron.

 

[MetaKron]

i still feel that sex between a very young child (waaay prepubescent) and an older person (20's and up) is wrong.
however, you're right. the only cases you ever hear about are the bad ones where the children are forced into it. who knows what would happen if the child was willing. those are the cases no one knows about because there was never a problem with it.
i read a book on molestation (sorry don't have the title) about a girl (about 14) who was having a sexual oriented relationship with her uncle. nothing was ever forced and no actual intercourse took place. but the girl actually begged her uncle to go ahead and finish the act. he wouldn't do it, though, because he wanted her "real" first time to be with a boy she loved. she tried to make him understand that she loved him...

now. does this count as a damaging sort of relationship despite the fact that she wanted it as much as he obviously did? she claimed to love him and wanted him but, ulitimately, would not be able to have him. not just because of societal taboos. direct relatives breed genetic defects. that is why incest is considered a taboo.

Who decides what constitutes damage? What constitutes damage? A lot of us are so unclear on that question that we can't possibly be talking about the same thing. We have been forcefed the idea that sex is bad for "children" even when they are of childbearing age. The fact is that a lot of us feel like sex was the only good thing about our teens. It's a hell of a lot better than a ham sandwich at that age, let me tell you. These days I'm ambiguous on that point.

 

[Oniw17]

The thread is about pedophilia, not incest?

 

[perplexity]

Who decides what constitutes damage? What constitutes damage?

If you need an issue to kick about, I think that most people would regard the experience of abortion as damaging.

--- Ron.

 

[S.A.M.]

If you need an issue to kick about, I think that most people would regard the experience of abortion as damaging.

--- Ron.

So are people having sex at much younger ages now than in the past?

 

[nubianconcubine]

So are people having sex at much younger ages now than in the past?

i can personally give a resounding yes to that question. a neighboring family in my hometown had two sons. the oldest one had a child by a 13-year-old girl by the time he was 15 and the younger son (11) had a child with a 9-year-old. it was very alarming.
i suppose the main reason younger sex is not approved is the mental state of the young. how will these new "families" survive. and what will become of the children who see their parents as so young?
it can't be good despite the fact that it may not be "damaging".

 

[S.A.M.]

i can personally give a resounding yes to that question. a neighboring family in my hometown had two sons. the oldest one had a child by a 13-year-old girl by the time he was 15 and the younger son (11) had a child with a 9-year-old. it was very alarming.
i suppose the main reason younger sex is not approved is the mental state of the young. how will these new "families" survive. and what will become of the children who see their parents as so young?
it can't be good despite the fact that it may not be "damaging".

Chidren having children at 9 is alarming and I'm not sure that it is not damaging...what is the emotional level of development at 9? And 9 and 11 year olds having sex seems strange to me...is that what children are doing these days?

 

[MetaKron]

Nothing new about early menarche in some children.

 

[S.A.M.]

Nothing new about early menarche in some children.

Yes, I know some girls with early menarche. But preganancy at 9? Am I the only one who finds this strange?

 

[q0101]

Some girls get their first periods around the age of 8 or 9. It is not a common occurrence, but it does happen. Any female that is menstruating can become pregnant. The first time that I ever heard about a girl being impregnated at the young age of 9 was when I was watching a documentary about abortions in various parts of the world. The documentary featured a story about young girls in South America that were impregnated after they were raped. It is not culturally acceptable to have abortions in most South American countries because most of the people are Catholics.

I also watched stories about girls in African and Asian countries that are forced to marry men when they are as young as 11. The last thing that I remember watching was a show that Oprah did about girls in Ethiopia. The girls were living at a shelter / clinic that provides medical treatment to girls with vaginal tearing or fissures. All of the girls were impregnated at a young age after they were forced into marriage. Unfortunately their bodies were too small to give birth without medical complications. Fissures (holes in the vagina) are a common occurrence in Ethiopia. Many of these girls are rejected by their husbands because of symptoms that they have after giving birth. Sometimes when the vaginal tearing occurs it creates a hole between the rectum and the vaginal wall. When the fecal matter gets into the vagina it causes an infection that smells really bad.

 

[issuishman]

First you say you don't remember if it hurt...

i don't remember that incident as a painful occurence.

Then, after I make argument based on belief in your statements, you change your story...

i was penetrated, but not with his penis. it did hurt but he didn't continue because he could see it was pointless.

We cannot have a reasonable discussion if you change your story in mid argumentation.

 

[nubianconcubine]

First you say you don't remember if it hurt...



Then, after I make argument based on belief in your statements, you change your story...



We cannot have a reasonable discussion if you change your story in mid argumentation.

i apologize for not being more specific. what i mean is the occurance wasn't a painful memory. it's not something that bothers me to recall. however, some of the actions that took place were physically painful, though not intolerably so. is that more satisfactory?

 

[issuishman]

i apologize for not being more specific. what i mean is the occurance wasn't a painful memory. it's not something that bothers me to recall. however, some of the actions that took place were physically painful, though not intolerably so. is that more satisfactory?

I would agree that tissue damage fits the category of abuse.