Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vector]

Cruve is gone.  Registered today and only posted in here, so not going to bother to log it.   Let me know if it comes back and I'll do it again.

Thank you very much for taking care of it so quickly!

[Vector]

Alright, this is back--Toady IP-banned the guy, but one more troll and I will have to lock it for a short dissuasion-period.  I guess that message was lost with the Second Banning.

Discuss away!

[Bohandas]

If you are talking about statutory rape, then yes that is ridiculous, they should not be on the sex offender list, and in most cases should never serve jail time.

Because Children totally understand sex and there are absolutely no power differences between adults and children.

If they're forced then its already covered under regular rape and the law is redundant. If they're not forced, then I want to go on record as stating that "'YES' MEANS YES!" just as surely as "no means no"

Can you imagine "'Yes' means No"? It sounds like a slogan from the novel 1984, right along with "War is Peace", "Freedom is Slavery", "love is Hate" and "Ignorance is Strength".

[G-Flex]

Alright, this is back--Toady IP-banned the guy, but one more troll and I will have to lock it for a short dissuasion-period.  I guess that message was lost with the Second Banning.

Discuss away!

Do you think temporarily locking a thread is really going to dissuade future trolls, though? People seem barely capable of even considering what was said 30 posts ago before they post, so I'm not sure.

It doesn't make it right just because the majority believes it, my viewpoint is purely emotional and I can't back it up with anything. I was replying SalmonGods post in which he called me "Go on and enjoy your adolescent noir lone good guy in a world of blood and ashes fantasies, then." Insinuating that I am some kind of special person with special beliefs not like anyone else feels this way yup they are just my personal fantasies. Not like anyone else shares this viewpoint. I am willing to bet more people share it than his.

Could you clarify your viewpoint, then? You said you hate people. Do you also hate yourself?

Also: It sounds less like you honestly think that most people share your perspective, and more that you want more people to share yours, because it absolves you of having to be responsible for it, in the sense that if you think what you feel is normal or common, you can be more comfortable with having it yourself, especially as it regards how you view other people. It's easier to hate everybody if you think most other people hate everybody too!

If you are talking about statutory rape, then yes that is ridiculous, they should not be on the sex offender list, and in most cases should never serve jail time.

Because Children totally understand sex and there are absolutely no power differences between adults and children.

If they're forced then its already covered under regular rape and the law is redundant. If they're not forced, then I want to go on record as believing that "'YES' MEANS YES!"

So you think that a six-year-old should be given every right to get into the stranger's van and touch the thing inside his pants in exchange for candy, and that said stranger should have every right to take his part in this? Should we also be selling cigarettes, booze, and heroin to preschoolers?

There is a difference in role between "child" and "adult". Children have certain decisions made for them until they're capable of understanding them enough to make them themselves. We are not born with the capacity to do so.

[Bohandas]

If you are talking about statutory rape, then yes that is ridiculous, they should not be on the sex offender list, and in most cases should never serve jail time.

Because Children totally understand sex and there are absolutely no power differences between adults and children.

If they're forced then its already covered under regular rape and the law is redundant. If they're not forced, then I want to go on record as believing that "'YES' MEANS YES!"

So you think that a six-year-old should be given every right to get into the stranger's van and touch the thing inside his pants in exchange for candy, and that said stranger should have every right to take his part in this? Should we also be selling cigarettes, booze, and heroin to preschoolers?

There is a difference in role between "child" and "adult". Children have certain decisions made for them until they're capable of understanding them enough to make them themselves. We are not born with the capacity to do so.

Ok, in that case the argument is valid I guess; I'll grant you the argument with prepubescent kids.

But the age of consent is often ridiculously high, to the point where there can be situations in which the encounter is sometimes initiated by the supposed "victim", because by the time people reach the age of consent in many states they have long, long since stopped being prepubescent (unless they have some extremely severe disease or genetic condition).

[RedKing]

I probably shouldn't wade into that debate, but I think relative ages are important here.

A 19-year old with a 16-year old? Shouldn't be criminal. Ill-advised, perhaps, but not criminal.
A 30-year old with a 16-year old? Yeah, that's a problem.

This of course creates grey areas that are going to be open to a lot of personal opinion and arbitrariness, and there's a cultural component. 12-year old brides are perfectly acceptable in some parts of the world. Even in the US, it wasn't that uncommon 100 years ago to have girls marrying and bearing children at 14 or 15. I have a few in my family tree like that.

[Virex]

And what about a 30 year old with a 18 year old?

[Bohandas]

And what about a 30 year old with a 18 year old?

Seems ok with me.

[Virex]

Why would 2 years make so much of a difference then? I mean, if it was about psychological development, the cutoff age should be 21 instead of 18.

[TheBronzePickle]

Well, I never expected such an argument to break out.

I can say that I know prepubescent children with enough maturity and understanding to consent . These are rather rare, though, and they probably wouldn't consent anyway, so it's not that big of a matter.

However, the illegality of people who are already physically adult consenting is kind of screwy. Admittedly, a lot of places are a lot more lenient than developed countries, and even in America a fair number of of states allow 16-year-olds to consent. Even so, that is a few years after they become biologically ready for sex, so YMMV.

[Bohandas]

If you are talking about statutory rape, then yes that is ridiculous, they should not be on the sex offender list, and in most cases should never serve jail time.

Because Children totally understand sex and there are absolutely no power differences between adults and children.

If they're forced then its already covered under regular rape and the law is redundant. If they're not forced, then I want to go on record as believing that "'YES' MEANS YES!"

So you think that a six-year-old should be given every right to get into the stranger's van and touch the thing inside his pants in exchange for candy, and that said stranger should have every right to take his part in this? Should we also be selling cigarettes, booze, and heroin to preschoolers?

There is a difference in role between "child" and "adult". Children have certain decisions made for them until they're capable of understanding them enough to make them themselves. We are not born with the capacity to do so.

Ok, in that case the argument is valid I guess; I'll grant you the argument with prepubescent kids.

But the age of consent is often ridiculously high, to the point where there can be situations in which the encounter is sometimes initiated by the supposed "victim", because by the time people reach the age of consent in many states they have long, long since stopped being prepubescent (unless they have some extremely severe disease or genetic condition).

Additionally, and I grant that this is a bit of a strawman, but hear me out, imagine if there were no humans and you had been born as some other kind of higher primate; What would you rather be, a Chimp? or a Bonobo?

[RedKing]

Ahh, bonobos. The sex fiends of the primate world. 

[Bohandas]

If you are talking about statutory rape, then yes that is ridiculous, they should not be on the sex offender list, and in most cases should never serve jail time.

Because Children totally understand sex and there are absolutely no power differences between adults and children.

This would be a lot less true if society didn't obsess over hiding all mayerial of even a remotely sexual nature from children. Biggest coverup conspiracy out there.

[ChairmanPoo]

Afaik, there's such a thing as age of consent (which, for the record, I think it's ridiculously low here at 13. Imo it should be 16 or so) which makes the above described situations not illegal (this comes from hearsay in a convo with three law students a while ago, so don't quote me on this,  though)

[kaijyuu]

Whew, looks like I missed quite the conversation. I'll just drop some bullet points, most if not all of which you seem to have discussed.

- Sex offenders treated as sub-human thoroughly disgusts me. If they're still considered a threat to society, they should still be in jail or an institution. If they're not, forcing them to live under a bridge because that's the only legal place they can in an entire city is ridiculous.
- Provided consent is given by both parties, I don't care what their age is. (fully understanding defining "consent" is hard enough already. I make no assertions as to defining consent, nor do I submit any alternative minimum ages except "lower." Tricky issue; all I have to say is the current implementation is dumb, and we haven't thought of much better)
- If the FBI doesn't include men in their rape definition I'll rage hard.