The complexity of sexuality

[scott3x]

This post is in response to Bells' post 74 in the "Rules concerning what constitutes a personal attack are too vague " thread in the SF Open Government forum.

I'm engaged in a discussion concerning the vagueness of the rules on personal attacks on sci forums. In the course of said discussion, leopold and others, such as Bells, decided to talk about something that was decidedly off topic. The subject is certainly important, but the place they chose to bring it up was not. I've decided to create a new thread here concerning said subject, as I think that if this subject could be said to belong in any sci fi forum, it would be this one. Due to the recent closure of another thread in this forum on the same subject, I had wanted to move it to PM, but Bells refused. I considered ignoring her post, but felt that the subject material was too important to do so. The topic definitely deals with ethics/morality and decidedly does -not- deal with how vague the rules on personal attacks are.

I -do- want to change -your- mind concerning your perception of me and perhaps concerning your perception of other things as well. This doesn't mean that I know it to be possible and the issue is definitely emotional for me as well, but I'm up for giving it a try.

Why?

I am a mere faceless individual on a forum who you think is beating you up. Why do you think I need to have my mind changed about what you want in regards to the age of consent laws? My perception of you is based off what you have written. So if that perception is a negative one, you'll need to go back over what you have written on this forum and have a look to see why it might be so. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out.

Just like it shouldn't be that hard to figure out what constitutes a personal attack, right?

Anyway, I try because even if you're just a 'faceless individual on a forum', you are still an individual and despite my protests of you figuratively beating me up, it's hardly an unusual event given the subject matter at hand. Think of this from another angle; do you think anyone -wants- to have enemies? I certainly don't. As a matter of fact, I would much prefer that we were friends. So I want to try to explain to you, first what I really believe instead of your perception of what I believe, and then why I believe it, in an attempt to get you to truly understand me. The goal is that we reach a point where we can agree. I may never even be able to truly explain what I believe, but I believe it's good to hope for things; sometimes, a wish really can come true, but it generally requires a fair amount of effort.

And you know this how? I believe you don't even have a very good idea of what I believe, never mind whether or not you can change those beliefs.

Oh no. You gave a very good indication for what you believe and want. Even after countless of queries were made about what you believed..

The queries can be counted and from what you say below I have decided that you definitely do -not- truly understand what I believe -or- want.

You fail to see that there's a difference between someone arguing that something is natural or potentially beneficial and someone arguing that they shouldn't have to obey the law concerning adult/minor sexual interactions. Yes, a person can argue both. I don't, however, and I find it immensely unfair that you would confuse people who abide by the law and people who don't.

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how it is beneficial for an adult to have sex with a minor.

I suggest you read more concerning the story of Vili Fualaau and Mary Kay Letourneau. Put simply, sex frequently feels good. Yes, even if you're below the age of consent. Ofcourse, if you're below the age of consent, the law can do rather nasty things to either you or your lover (or both); they can throw you or you lover in jail, for instance...

I know it is not beneficial from evidence and studies done on the issue.

I suggest you read Pedophilia: Biosocial Dimensions. Paul Okami provides some excellent critiques on some studies and the biased methods used in the studies; you may have read such studies. They also write of a study they felt was done in a much more professional manner.

You may abide by the law, but it is only because you don't want your backside roasting in jail..

You're wrong there. The fact that you've come to this conclusion amply demonstrates the fact that even though you -think- you understand my beliefs, you clearly don't.

I don't know the people you've dealt with. But that is not -my- position and the fact that you think it is speaks volumes concerning your misunderstanding of said position.

Your position is that you won't do something that is illegal. But it still does not take away the desire to do it, does it? You can attempt to debate that it is beneficial for a parent or trusted adult to test to gauge their child's sexual maturity and act as sex educators and teaching their children sexual acts as much as you please. It still does not take away from the simple fact that what you advocate would involve adults preying on children for sex.

I disagree with that assertion. Why must adult/minor sexual interactions be abuse or a form of 'preying' on them? I suggest you read more concerning people who feel quite differently on the matter, such as Vili Fualaau.

Making it sound pretty by saying it is beneficial because the child would enjoy the sexual encounters with their educators and testers as much as you so please. At the end of the day, it still involves adults having sex with minors. The people I have dealt with believed much as you do. The only difference between you and them is that they ignored the law and did what they felt was right and natural, regardless of the child's feelings on the matter

Bells, that's an insult of the first order. -Regardless- of the child's feelings? Bells, if the child didn't want to engage in a sexual encounter, I would by no means condone said sexual encounter, regardless of the laws or societal mores. Again, I ask you to consider cases such as that of Vili Fualaau. He definitely -did- want to engage in a sexual interaction with his adult lover and after many hardships endured due to society's messed up system regarding sexuality, he finally married her.

while you respect the laws as they are now, being such a good, law abiding citizen and all, but you would prefer the laws be changed so that you can do what feels natural to you without any repercussions to you.

The natural argument is theobserver's, not mine. You claim to know my views perfectly regarding this issue, but apparently you can't even tell when I or theobserver is speaking. What I go for is what I believe to be beneficial. I believe that, if the laws were and by extension societal views on the subject were different, one could engage in such sexual interactions without fear of negative repercussions.

 

[James R]

This is another attempt to revive a dead discussion. Closed.