cool soldier there is no way i would let you itno a class of 13 or 14 yr olds then. they may well ahve gone through the physical onset of puberty but the hell if they are old enough to give informed consent to an adult having sex with them. they are not. I work with kids these ages- they simoply dont have the enmotional maturity or the life exoperience not to be seriously disadvantged by placing their trust and body int he hands of a sexual partner of mature years.
kiddie porn
- Thread starter otheadp
- Start date
coolsoldier
Registered Senior Member
OK you are completely misrepresenting what I said. I said that some teenagers are mature enough to know and understand what they are getting into. Admittedly most aren't. Maturity is an individual issue though. You can't say "at this age children are mature enough to make their own decisions" because some people are emotionally mature as teenagers, and some 40 year olds never emotionally mature. READ: It depends on the individual maturity of the individual.
Please read what I have written before you respond to it :m:
"Since when do you need to trust someone to fuck them? "
Well xev, since forever for me.
Different for you is it?
Actually, I think for most women there is a strength disadvantage with most men and therefore in a sense a woman is very physically vunerable in the sense of risking physical abuse or murder in being alone and naked with a man. So it is better if you can trust them. The same in any sitiuation where one person has a physical strength advantage over another.
However in the examples i was talking about, these kids are very at risk placing their trust in someone who not only is likely to be physically more powerful and mature than them, but also more experienced and more knowledgable in the ways of the world. Emotion and sex are often entangled and it is often more than their bodies young people would trust a seemingly sophisticated otr mature older person with- it is their hearts, minds and future development to maturity.
Well xev, since forever for me.
Different for you is it? Actually, I think for most women there is a strength disadvantage with most men and therefore in a sense a woman is very physically vunerable in the sense of risking physical abuse or murder in being alone and naked with a man. So it is better if you can trust them. The same in any sitiuation where one person has a physical strength advantage over another.
However in the examples i was talking about, these kids are very at risk placing their trust in someone who not only is likely to be physically more powerful and mature than them, but also more experienced and more knowledgable in the ways of the world. Emotion and sex are often entangled and it is often more than their bodies young people would trust a seemingly sophisticated otr mature older person with- it is their hearts, minds and future development to maturity.
CONSENT
My objective opinion is this;
Informed consent is only one aspect of the issue at hand, the other is capacity. Ask this question, does the person who gives consent have the capacity to understand what consent means?
James R
You hit the nail on the head.
My objective opinion is this;
Informed consent is only one aspect of the issue at hand, the other is capacity. Ask this question, does the person who gives consent have the capacity to understand what consent means?
James R
You hit the nail on the head.
Re: CONSENT
While I might agree that optimally you might both be correct (in a perfect, sterile, uniform world) how do you consider actual life to be even remotely optimal.?
In other words, you cannot have sex for the first time and be 'informed' ya know? No two people can have the same comprehension of what they're getting themselves into, but EVERYONE (to some extent) has the primal urge to fuck. Once equiped to do so, who the fuck are you to determine if someone who claims that they made an informed decision, didn't?
While I might agree that optimally you might both be correct (in a perfect, sterile, uniform world) how do you consider actual life to be even remotely optimal.?
In other words, you cannot have sex for the first time and be 'informed' ya know? No two people can have the same comprehension of what they're getting themselves into, but EVERYONE (to some extent) has the primal urge to fuck. Once equiped to do so, who the fuck are you to determine if someone who claims that they made an informed decision, didn't?
Wes... How are you?
Think of my point this way:
Most likely you have, when you were younger(as I have), coerced someone younger than you to do something stupid. Why did they do what you coerced them to do? Because their capacity to understand fully what it was they were/are gonna do was inept.
When one person understands that anothers mental capacity is not developed enough -- because of mental ilness or just too young -- to fully understand ramifications of their coercion then it is wrong..
Think of it this way Wes..., if you rolled a quarter into a busy street and told a 10 year old to go get it they would. I doubt you would blame them for getting hit by a car. Or would you?????
Think of my point this way:
Most likely you have, when you were younger(as I have), coerced someone younger than you to do something stupid. Why did they do what you coerced them to do? Because their capacity to understand fully what it was they were/are gonna do was inept.
When one person understands that anothers mental capacity is not developed enough -- because of mental ilness or just too young -- to fully understand ramifications of their coercion then it is wrong..
Think of it this way Wes..., if you rolled a quarter into a busy street and told a 10 year old to go get it they would. I doubt you would blame them for getting hit by a car. Or would you?????
Re: Wes... How are you?
Good thanks, you? It's been a while, wow.
/hink of my point this way:
So you think that my response comes from a failure on my part to 'really understand' your point? What do I have to do to get a litte more credit?
/Most likely you have, when you were younger(as I have), coerced someone younger than you to do something stupid.
Yeah when I was under 10 probably, hmm.. okay maybe a little older. Hmm.. well, it depends on "stupid to whom". I haven't done it on a "stupid to me" basis for a long time but on a "stupid to other people" basis I'm sure I have.
Actually no, I never 'coerce' people into doing anything. I think people act of their will.
/Why did they do what you coerced them to do? Because their capacity to understand fully what it was they were/are gonna do was inept.
Do you think so? LOL. Wow so you're basically a commie then eh? I mean, you want me to take responsibility for YOUR actions (no matter what I did to influences you (within the bounds of ethics)) right? Okay, I'll derantificate and attempt a more decent conversation. I completely disagree with your analysis as I find it short sighted of realistic considerations. It's not that simple. In general as long as my "coersion" as you put it, is with the bounds of ethics (no mal-intent) you are resposible for your choice to follow my advice.
/When one person understands that anothers mental capacity is not developed enough -- because of mental ilness or just too young -- to fully understand ramifications of their coercion then it is wrong..
I know adults that are less sophisticated than some children. I'm sure you've met some. As you should have noted I addressed that issue with "if someone who claims that they made an informed decision". Do you see my meaning?
/Think of it this way Wes..., if you rolled a quarter into a busy street and told a 10 year old to go get it they would. I doubt you would blame them for getting hit by a car. Or would you?????
Well, a ten year old should have the sense to look both ways. Actually that is an excellent idea to allow evolution to work its magic. To be fair, I'm not sure I'd want someone to try it on MY kids, but regardless I'd think they'd pass (if they were old enough).
Why do you want to protect people from themselves???? I'm not talking about physical rape, I'm talking about the concept of statutory rape. I think that if there is some sort of problem because of sex between two post-pubescent individuals, it should be worked out due to the nature of the problem and the particulars of the scenario at the time. The idea that "it is wrong because they aren't informed" is archaic IMO. It's certainly true some of the time, but so are other things.
Good thanks, you? It's been a while, wow.
/hink of my point this way:
So you think that my response comes from a failure on my part to 'really understand' your point? What do I have to do to get a litte more credit?
/Most likely you have, when you were younger(as I have), coerced someone younger than you to do something stupid.
Yeah when I was under 10 probably, hmm.. okay maybe a little older.
Hmm.. well, it depends on "stupid to whom". I haven't done it on a "stupid to me" basis for a long time but on a "stupid to other people" basis I'm sure I have.Actually no, I never 'coerce' people into doing anything. I think people act of their will.
/Why did they do what you coerced them to do? Because their capacity to understand fully what it was they were/are gonna do was inept.
Do you think so? LOL. Wow so you're basically a commie then eh? I mean, you want me to take responsibility for YOUR actions (no matter what I did to influences you (within the bounds of ethics)) right? Okay, I'll derantificate and attempt a more decent conversation. I completely disagree with your analysis as I find it short sighted of realistic considerations. It's not that simple. In general as long as my "coersion" as you put it, is with the bounds of ethics (no mal-intent) you are resposible for your choice to follow my advice.
/When one person understands that anothers mental capacity is not developed enough -- because of mental ilness or just too young -- to fully understand ramifications of their coercion then it is wrong..
I know adults that are less sophisticated than some children. I'm sure you've met some. As you should have noted I addressed that issue with "if someone who claims that they made an informed decision". Do you see my meaning?
/Think of it this way Wes..., if you rolled a quarter into a busy street and told a 10 year old to go get it they would. I doubt you would blame them for getting hit by a car. Or would you?????
Well, a ten year old should have the sense to look both ways. Actually that is an excellent idea to allow evolution to work its magic. To be fair, I'm not sure I'd want someone to try it on MY kids, but regardless I'd think they'd pass (if they were old enough).
Why do you want to protect people from themselves???? I'm not talking about physical rape, I'm talking about the concept of statutory rape. I think that if there is some sort of problem because of sex between two post-pubescent individuals, it should be worked out due to the nature of the problem and the particulars of the scenario at the time. The idea that "it is wrong because they aren't informed" is archaic IMO. It's certainly true some of the time, but so are other things.
My two cents
Children and intellectually challenged individuals are not going to understand the full ramifications of consenting to sex by whatever means they have been conned into doing so. Whether it is sooner or later, the consequences of their actions will play some part in their maturing process. I would like to think that adults have the integrity to recognise when an individual does not fully comprehend what they’re consenting to, and certainly it sickens me that any adult would consider a child fully aware of what he or she is doing.
What's more sickening is an adult saying that they are only expressing love of a child by submitting them to sexual acts. Doesn't anyone see thought that? Wake up.
Children and intellectually challenged individuals are not going to understand the full ramifications of consenting to sex by whatever means they have been conned into doing so. Whether it is sooner or later, the consequences of their actions will play some part in their maturing process. I would like to think that adults have the integrity to recognise when an individual does not fully comprehend what they’re consenting to, and certainly it sickens me that any adult would consider a child fully aware of what he or she is doing.
What's more sickening is an adult saying that they are only expressing love of a child by submitting them to sexual acts. Doesn't anyone see thought that? Wake up.
Lots of people are "intellectually challenged" , the number of People(adults) I've seen "coerced" into sex is great indeed, in fact the type of consent that you guys are implying is essential is a rarity.
Sexual encounters often come about after one person tricks the other into having sex with them, I would honestly say most, a large percentage. I think thats what makes a males genes worthy in the human species. Male weaver birds need to be good house weavers, male giant pacific sea horses need to be good dancers, male humans need to be good shit talkers and deadpan actors.
Don't get me wrong, I think bangin kids is not acceptable but we need a different angle of attack. The fact they are naive has nothing to do with it, 80% of the population are unspeakably naive and are being talked into sex much the same way a child would be.
But this is fine, and even slightly amusing.
Pedofilia is wrong because children have child bodies that aren't meant for sex. Menstruating doesn't mean anything, its like a computer loading up, its working but you can't type yet if you know what I mean.
The question is could the person you are bangin successfully concieve a child through natural means without complications? If not, you are a pedo.
One a side note, I don't try to "pick up tail" with deception, but seriously most guys do, nearly all of my friends and nearly every guy I see in action when I'm out.
I've dabbled in the art whilst drunk, but I find it degrading to both parties, not just the female... But yeah particularly the female, and they consistenly fall for it, can't argue with the results, manipulative skills and the ability to lie and knowingly decieve are obviously traits favoured by evolution.
Sexual encounters often come about after one person tricks the other into having sex with them, I would honestly say most, a large percentage. I think thats what makes a males genes worthy in the human species. Male weaver birds need to be good house weavers, male giant pacific sea horses need to be good dancers, male humans need to be good shit talkers and deadpan actors.
Don't get me wrong, I think bangin kids is not acceptable but we need a different angle of attack. The fact they are naive has nothing to do with it, 80% of the population are unspeakably naive and are being talked into sex much the same way a child would be.
But this is fine, and even slightly amusing.
Pedofilia is wrong because children have child bodies that aren't meant for sex. Menstruating doesn't mean anything, its like a computer loading up, its working but you can't type yet if you know what I mean.
The question is could the person you are bangin successfully concieve a child through natural means without complications? If not, you are a pedo.
One a side note, I don't try to "pick up tail" with deception, but seriously most guys do, nearly all of my friends and nearly every guy I see in action when I'm out.
I've dabbled in the art whilst drunk, but I find it degrading to both parties, not just the female... But yeah particularly the female, and they consistenly fall for it, can't argue with the results, manipulative skills and the ability to lie and knowingly decieve are obviously traits favoured by evolution.
Dr.....
Dr. Lou Natic;
You make some interesting observations and in the course of doing so you have revealed gaps in my assertions. Good Job! I will now attempt to fill those gaps:
I disagree that physiological factors alone can determine whether or not you are a pedo. If I'm shootin' blanks or a woman is un-fertile does not imply pedo. So, science alone cannot unravel this quagmire.
You talk about manipulation in a mans/womans quest for gettin' lucky! True dat! I have participated and equally been duped!
Although this manipulation took place on a level playing field. I believe that at the outset both a male and a female, or male male female female or any combination thereof, understand but may not accept that the purpose of the interaction may be for copulation purposes. I challenge you to go up to a woman you do not know and start talking to her and tell me you can't feel sexual energy.. Most times nothing develops from that but sometimes it will. Of course it is gonna take some good talking and manouvering if you want to get lucky, if not no one would get lucky!! BUT, if at any time neither party understands -- due to mental capacity or whatever -- then it is coercion and wrong. If you apply this to the realm of pedophilia or having sex with a mentally challenged person, then the formula is flawless.
Once again, science can not provide us with clear answers, it takes a social component to make it complete!
Dr. Lou Natic;
You make some interesting observations and in the course of doing so you have revealed gaps in my assertions. Good Job! I will now attempt to fill those gaps:
I disagree that physiological factors alone can determine whether or not you are a pedo. If I'm shootin' blanks or a woman is un-fertile does not imply pedo. So, science alone cannot unravel this quagmire.
You talk about manipulation in a mans/womans quest for gettin' lucky! True dat! I have participated and equally been duped!
Although this manipulation took place on a level playing field. I believe that at the outset both a male and a female, or male male female female or any combination thereof, understand but may not accept that the purpose of the interaction may be for copulation purposes. I challenge you to go up to a woman you do not know and start talking to her and tell me you can't feel sexual energy.. Most times nothing develops from that but sometimes it will. Of course it is gonna take some good talking and manouvering if you want to get lucky, if not no one would get lucky!! BUT, if at any time neither party understands -- due to mental capacity or whatever -- then it is coercion and wrong. If you apply this to the realm of pedophilia or having sex with a mentally challenged person, then the formula is flawless.Once again, science can not provide us with clear answers, it takes a social component to make it complete!
Dr Lou,
I understand what you're saying, but I think you're misinterpreting what I'm trying to say. By 'intellectually challenged' I'm referring to retarded or simple minded individuals. Stupidity does not come under the heading. Most females know when they're being conned and even though guys think they doing the leading, it's really up to the female to eventually consent.
I'm only objecting to children and the retarded being subjected to the urging of someone desperate to have sex.
There are silly women out there and they'll learn their lessons in due time. Being naive doesn't mean being retarded. I know about the games played by both men and women.
I'll just reiterate that pedophiles do not have any excuses to take advantage of children. The comment earlier about this being a way of showing love is just not acceptable.
Of course this is only my opinion, and I'm probably more outraged by it because of attempts on myself when I was a child. I was lucky enough to be able to disentangle myself from the situations but many children are not so lucky. Those instances are still very clear in my memory, so I have no doubt that kids grow up with problems through experiences with sick adults.
Cheers
Teri
I understand what you're saying, but I think you're misinterpreting what I'm trying to say. By 'intellectually challenged' I'm referring to retarded or simple minded individuals. Stupidity does not come under the heading. Most females know when they're being conned and even though guys think they doing the leading, it's really up to the female to eventually consent.
I'm only objecting to children and the retarded being subjected to the urging of someone desperate to have sex.
There are silly women out there and they'll learn their lessons in due time. Being naive doesn't mean being retarded. I know about the games played by both men and women.
I'll just reiterate that pedophiles do not have any excuses to take advantage of children. The comment earlier about this being a way of showing love is just not acceptable.
Of course this is only my opinion, and I'm probably more outraged by it because of attempts on myself when I was a child. I was lucky enough to be able to disentangle myself from the situations but many children are not so lucky. Those instances are still very clear in my memory, so I have no doubt that kids grow up with problems through experiences with sick adults.
Cheers
Teri
Hi xev
"Uhhh....I'm not even going to begin on this one. Suffice to say that I don't view all men as psychotic rapists. "
I agree. Nevertheless since you are physically in their power when alone with them what i said still satnds- it involves trust- at least the trust that they are not a psychotic rapist or killer.
"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So it is better if you can trust them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you lose the fear of physical abuse or murder and then sex is boooooring. "
Oh really xev? I wouldn't have thought it of you. Can't you think of other ways to make sex interesting.
"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emotion and sex are often entangled and it is often more than their bodies young people would trust a seemingly sophisticated otr mature older person with- it is their hearts, minds and future development to maturity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is this something the government should regulate - a broken heart?"
No, but it isnt a broken heart i am talking about. I am talking about interfering in the mental and emotional development of a child into an adult.
__________________
"That's the problem with killing for amusement/sexual pleasure. Damned inefficiant. What we need is some way to efficiantly kill known idiots. Like a programmed killer android - hundreds of killer androids programmed to recognize morons and immediately exterminate them. "
That is a very controversial statement indeed. Problem is who judges the idiots for a start. And second, what about that old piece of morality about it being wrong to kill?
ele
"Uhhh....I'm not even going to begin on this one. Suffice to say that I don't view all men as psychotic rapists. "
I agree. Nevertheless since you are physically in their power when alone with them what i said still satnds- it involves trust- at least the trust that they are not a psychotic rapist or killer.
"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So it is better if you can trust them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you lose the fear of physical abuse or murder and then sex is boooooring. "
Oh really xev? I wouldn't have thought it of you. Can't you think of other ways to make sex interesting.
"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emotion and sex are often entangled and it is often more than their bodies young people would trust a seemingly sophisticated otr mature older person with- it is their hearts, minds and future development to maturity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is this something the government should regulate - a broken heart?"
No, but it isnt a broken heart i am talking about. I am talking about interfering in the mental and emotional development of a child into an adult.
__________________
"That's the problem with killing for amusement/sexual pleasure. Damned inefficiant. What we need is some way to efficiantly kill known idiots. Like a programmed killer android - hundreds of killer androids programmed to recognize morons and immediately exterminate them. "
That is a very controversial statement indeed. Problem is who judges the idiots for a start. And second, what about that old piece of morality about it being wrong to kill?
ele
"In other words, you cannot have sex for the first time and be 'informed' ya know? No two people can have the same comprehension of what they're getting themselves into, but EVERYONE (to some extent) has the primal urge to fuck. Once equiped to do so, who the fuck are you to determine if someone who claims that they made an informed decision, didn't?"
Wes, that is such a bad justification for pedophilia. Maybe it is an adequate justification for children having underage sex- ie experimentation between thos eof equal maturity- but it just doesn't stand as justification for an adult abusing a child. How could you think it would?
Wes, that is such a bad justification for pedophilia. Maybe it is an adequate justification for children having underage sex- ie experimentation between thos eof equal maturity- but it just doesn't stand as justification for an adult abusing a child. How could you think it would?
Lou
"Pedofilia is wrong because children have child bodies that aren't meant for sex. Menstruating doesn't mean anything, its like a computer loading up, its working but you can't type yet if you know what I mean.
The question is could the person you are bangin successfully concieve a child through natural means without complications? If not, you are a pedo.
"
It is wrong because it is interfering with the mental and emotional development of a child on their journey to adult hood. Many 14 yr old girls could conceive and carry a baby. That doesnt mean itis okay for a 50 yr old man to have sex with them. clearly such a man would be taking adbvantage of the youth and inexperience of the child and also not giving a damn about f$%#g with her mind and emotions whih are still developing into the person she will one day be.
Terri
I am sorry you suffered that. I agree with you, pedophilia is definitely not only a matter of physiological definition.
"Pedofilia is wrong because children have child bodies that aren't meant for sex. Menstruating doesn't mean anything, its like a computer loading up, its working but you can't type yet if you know what I mean.
The question is could the person you are bangin successfully concieve a child through natural means without complications? If not, you are a pedo.
"
It is wrong because it is interfering with the mental and emotional development of a child on their journey to adult hood. Many 14 yr old girls could conceive and carry a baby. That doesnt mean itis okay for a 50 yr old man to have sex with them. clearly such a man would be taking adbvantage of the youth and inexperience of the child and also not giving a damn about f$%#g with her mind and emotions whih are still developing into the person she will one day be.
Terri
I am sorry you suffered that. I agree with you, pedophilia is definitely not only a matter of physiological definition.
coolsoldier
Registered Senior Member
I think it is entirely possible that teenagers suffer psychological problems after sex with adults not necessarily as a direct result of the encounter, but because of the social stigma surrounding it. If this is in fact the case, psychological problems could be avoided either by (a) changing the social norms or (b) not fucking teenagers. Since the former is not likely to happen, the latter is probably the best idea, not because of an inherent problem with the act itself, but rather because of the social norms of our society.
I'm no psychology expert, though, so I could (easily) be wrong.
I'm no psychology expert, though, so I could (easily) be wrong.
ele:
I guess you're just physically weak. I suppose if one is incapable of defending oneself, one would have to be dependant on the mercy of others.
As for "trust" - well. One does not have to fuck everything that moves. This may come as a suprise to you, but it is not absolutely impossible to get to know a man before fucking him.
Of course there's an element of risk, but the fact that I risk being killed in sanguinary and delightful ways during coitus does not mean that I trust the person I am fucking not to do this. It simply means that I've accepted the low probability of him doing so.
Duuuuuh.
We're not talking about children, we're talking about adolescents. I agree that a child is incapable of consent - nor even physically prepared for sex - but an adolescent is.
My robots do.
Even if morality was useful for anything, I'd say that it's more morally wrong to overbreed so much that we destroy the aestetics of our planet.
A fourteen year old is not a child. A fourteen year old is an adolescent/teen.
That's not clear at all. You have absolutely no argument backing up your assertions.
I guess you're just physically weak. I suppose if one is incapable of defending oneself, one would have to be dependant on the mercy of others.
As for "trust" - well. One does not have to fuck everything that moves. This may come as a suprise to you, but it is not absolutely impossible to get to know a man before fucking him.
Of course there's an element of risk, but the fact that I risk being killed in sanguinary and delightful ways during coitus does not mean that I trust the person I am fucking not to do this. It simply means that I've accepted the low probability of him doing so.
Duuuuuh.
We're not talking about children, we're talking about adolescents. I agree that a child is incapable of consent - nor even physically prepared for sex - but an adolescent is.
My robots do.
Even if morality was useful for anything, I'd say that it's more morally wrong to overbreed so much that we destroy the aestetics of our planet.
A fourteen year old is not a child. A fourteen year old is an adolescent/teen.
That's not clear at all. You have absolutely no argument backing up your assertions.
Last edited:
I said the same thing lou said except he said it better (at least he said what I was trying to get at much more clearly), and I don't think there's any excuse for sex with children. Once someone goes through puberty though, it becomes increasingly difficult to determine if they can make an "informed decision". As a matter of fact I don't think it's possible to really make an "informed" decision before doing something. Post-pubescent people generally understand the potential of their actions. They know about STD's and pregnancy, it's just that some percentage of them doesn't comprehend the permanence their decisions, etc. It seems to me that the same can be said for adults. Regardless, the biological urge directs them to action and some of them will heed it. It should ultimately only be a criminal act based on particulars of the scenario. I understand that picking a seemingly sensible number simplifies the legal process in a significant manner, but that doesn't make it ethical.
EDIT: Ele, upon reviewing your posts it could be said that the way you use the word "child" could be descriptive of people in their 50's. Some people are NEVER adults in the way you seem to think they should be. I might ponder if YOU could be considered an adult by MY standards and the same in reverse.
Last edited:
WES
I use the word child advisedly. i am a teacher. I am not a teacher who belittles adolescents but am one who accpets them as developing young adults. they are treated more as equals in my class than in many classes in schools. Nevertheless, from the point of view of someone who knows several of these young people, these adolescents very well indeed, I am aware that they are definitely still growing up whatever their physiological development and equipment. A girl or boy doesnt become fair game for a pedophile because they turn thirteen or fourteen. They are the same person, one day olde than when they were 12 or 13.
I am talking about my experience of people of these ages, including being privy to their thoughts and feelings and discussions of relationships and being trained and aware of their emotional and mental development. While it is true people grow through-out their lives it is without question that children of thirteen or fourteen are not as emotionally and mentally developed as adults and are still working out their sexuality and their perdsonality and their beliefs that will guide them and their future development. Fucking with their minds, emotions and bodies, taking advantage of them before they have actually developed in these ways, is wrong and it is pedophilia.
I use the word child advisedly. i am a teacher. I am not a teacher who belittles adolescents but am one who accpets them as developing young adults. they are treated more as equals in my class than in many classes in schools. Nevertheless, from the point of view of someone who knows several of these young people, these adolescents very well indeed, I am aware that they are definitely still growing up whatever their physiological development and equipment. A girl or boy doesnt become fair game for a pedophile because they turn thirteen or fourteen. They are the same person, one day olde than when they were 12 or 13.
I am talking about my experience of people of these ages, including being privy to their thoughts and feelings and discussions of relationships and being trained and aware of their emotional and mental development. While it is true people grow through-out their lives it is without question that children of thirteen or fourteen are not as emotionally and mentally developed as adults and are still working out their sexuality and their perdsonality and their beliefs that will guide them and their future development. Fucking with their minds, emotions and bodies, taking advantage of them before they have actually developed in these ways, is wrong and it is pedophilia.