Weirdness

---

anyway don't want to argue anymore. bye

The women of a2a... gotta love em'. I would have jumped in, but it looks like the job is done already.

Hmm, no-one has really dealt much with the substantive issue of what really makes something right or wrong. I think a sexual practice is wrong if:(a) One of the people doesn't agree to it, or hasn't had the opportunity for mature and sober consideration; or(b) It causes serious damage or risk of damage; or(c) It is against one of the people's beliefs or principles.Perhaps other people can add others.

http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htmall the answers you seek.be sure to click on a specific place to see more, because a few places have the age set at 13.but, really, ppl shouldnt have sex until they know exactly what theyre doing, and not when they think they know what theyre doing.

Puffypony04:I replied to your initial posts about 14-16 yr. old breasts and looking down the blouses of shop assistants. My responses were strongly negative. Let me explain why I do not think that sexualizing minors is acceptable. First, I agree with Ineligible's list. I think that consent is the critical factor, as the other categories do not properly distinguish between sex with a minor and any other forms of potentially dangerous or “deviant” sex. After all, there are many legal sexual acts that are extremely dangerous, and there are an equal amount of legal sexual acts that offend certain cultural mores. The distinction between these acts and act that you propose (threesomes with 14 year olds) lies in the realm of consent. I do not think that, for instance, homosexuality is akin to sex with minors, precisely because those two acts involve different levels of consent— two men may meaningfully consent to sex, while a 14 year old girl’s consent might either be meaningless, per se, or coerced by an older individual. I also disagree that changing cultural mores about certain sexual activities (such as homosexual sex) imply that other traditionally sexually deviant acts, like sex with minors, should be considered more acceptable. In fact, I think that your comparisons are totally artificial and contrary to actual trends in the law. In reality, consent-based laws (such as statutory rape) have become STRICTER in the recent past, while laws that outlaw consensual acts have become looser.As I stated before, I focus on consent. There is a point at which “consent” between a younger person and an older person is void. There are two reasons for this: 1. children of a certain age are not mature enough to consent to certain activities; 2. It is too easy for a 25 year old, for instance, to coerce “consent” out of a 14 year old—thereby making such “consent” practically meaningless. The difference in power between an adult and a child is so huge that it makes consent under such circumstances questionable, because the alleged “consent” may result from pressure applied by the adult against the child. Laws against sex with minors are actually only one of a series of laws that act to prevent such unequal bargaining and coerced “consent.” For instance, under most circumstances, children cannot contract. We’re afraid that adults would take advantage of the power differential between adults and children to exact unfair contracting terms. I think that the contract analogy provides a much better comparison to sex with minors than the homosexual sex analogy that you’ve made in several posts. For the same reason that we wouldn’t allow a fourteen year-old to sign away their inheritance to an adult, we also won’t allow them to have sex with an adult. The same cannot be said about the relationship between two adult men. The natural counterargument to an argument based on “consent” is that some minors are mature enough to negate any power differentials, thus making their consent valid. This is true, but we have to set the level of consent somewhere. Even you must agree that consent between, for instance, a 25 year old and a 6 year old would be meaningless. Most jurisdictions have set the level of consent at 18. Yes, this is arbitrary, but any specific age would be arbitrary. The fact is that we must set the line somewhere in order to protect genuine consent, and 18 is as good a point as any. Of course, your blouse post brought up another consent issue, and it explains why my reaction was so negative. What makes you think that a shop keeper wants you to look down her blouse? As far as I can tell, you’re gaining sexual pleasure at her expense—she didn’t agree to any sort of sexual act with you. I think you need to stop thinking about all sexually “deviant” acts as equivalent. There is a huge difference between consensual and non-consensual acts, and this is precisely what separates your “weird” posts from the “weird” posts of others.

Yeah, I would be very very upset if I realized some strange man was looking down my blouse and liking it. I'm sexually harassed at work as it is and I know lots of women are. It's not something that should be tolerated, you just feel so violated and dirty. It's really unfair.(The issue is being dealt with people so no worries )