Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
No bio...
User ID: 297
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4hr ago
Do you think it can also be the case that people show videos of the kind of people they hate to argue that the kind of people they hate are all like this?
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
16hr ago
It's rape, but I have to have evidence it happened other than victim testimony. If the accused denies the victim's testimony, and there's no other evidence of rape, then they cancel out and I wouldn't convict.
That's the law, in the US.
You thought I liked little kids
I did not think or say that.
but really I'm just anti-feminist.
Obviously, but a very particular type of anti-feminist.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
16hr ago
As a rule, I can't condone the idea of labeling someone a felon because a woman says she's offended by him.
Ah.
What you prefer to my indices are the stated feelings of older women. As a rule, I can't condone the idea of labeling someone a felon because a woman says she's offended by him. She's got to show some physical damage or demonstrate some kind of financial or physical grievance using hard evidence.
So rape that leaves no injury isn't rape?
Maybe the difference between me and age of consent should be 18 folks is that I won't convict a man or legislate based solely on woman's scorn.
Ah.
I see this is not just about the age of consent.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
16hr ago
You can never make this argument for a mentally normal 15 year old.
Can't you? A 5-year-old can learn what sex is, and a very sheltered 15-year-old might be as naive as that fictional child.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
18hr ago
What do you mean by exploitation exactly? How is this bad for society, even if it makes minors happy?
There's a very prolific and once-ubiquitous science fiction author named Piers Anthony, most famous for his Xanth series. (Bear with me here.) He's not quite as popular as he once was, so you don't hear about him much anymore, but he was all over the place in the 80s and 90s.
Besides being prolific and writing a ton of series, the thing almost anyone who's ever read Piers Anthony will tell you is that every one his books oozes horny, and there are very few that don't involve some underage sex, at least hinted at if not explicit. Piers Anthony is a classic Dirty Old Man. And hey, everyone has their thing.
Anyway, one of his most infamous novels is Firefly, which is a horror novel about some kind of ooze-monster that makes people super horny. I read it so long ago I don't really remember the plot much, but I do remember a rather infamous courtroom scene:
The Judge refocused his eyes and mopped his brow with a handkerchief. "Is—is the Defense ready to proceed?"
"We are, Your Honor. We believe that this poignant tape establishes that though the Defendant may be technically guilty of the charge against him, he is not morally guilty. He did not seek the girl, he did not force his attention on her. He demurred at every stage, by her own testimony. It was entirely voluntary on her part. In fact, they were lovers, in the truest sense, age no barrier. The law may say he is guilty, but the law is sometimes an ass."
Several members of the Jury nodded their agreement.
Then he turned to the Jury. "If there is guilt here, then surely it is that of the father, who set her up by incestuously toying with her. And of her brother, who practiced sodomy on her with a candle. Remember, it was to escape that abuse that she first fled and found the Defendant. The Defendant never hurt her. He did only what she asked. He gave her what no other man did. He loved her. We may take issue with the manner of the expression of that love, but we cannot deny its reality. She came to him of her own accord, again and again, because what he offered her was so much better than what she received at home. Her family should be on trial!"
The child here is, IIRC, five. Five years old. Piers Anthony writes a sympathetic courtroom scene in which jurors are moved to tears by the unfairness of prosecuting a man who fucked a five-year-old because they truly loved each other.
Lest I be accused of committing the classic fallacy of assuming fiction represents the author's actual views, Piers Anthony is also notable for stuffing every one of his books with chapter-long Author's Notes in which he is not shy about his views. Let's just say while he never comes out directly and says "Yes, fucking consenting five-year-olds should be legal," it's, uh, not exactly hiding between the lines.
My point: I don't buy it from a rather accomplished and very charming author who did his best to make it plausible in the pages of a novel. I certainly don't buy it from you. The reason "statutory rape" exists is that the law recognizes that children can be persuaded to do things, and even enjoy things, that are not good for them. A child will enjoy eating ice cream for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. A child will enjoy playing all day and not going to school. A child will enjoy dressing up in skimpy clothes and makeup and prancing around in front of adoring grown men who tell her how pretty she is. And a child, no doubt, can be persuaded that she enjoys sex with a grown man.
This is why we have age of consent laws. To protect children from, well, people who think "She likes it" means it's okay.
To address your other point, that you seem to deny the testimony of victims of child sexual abuse who later claim they were too young to consent and that even if they enjoyed it at the time, it fucked them up later in life, I suggest you watch some parole hearings, of which there are many on YouTube. Chomos often use the "She seduced me/it was consensual" argument. I think they usually really believe this. I know some guys believe every rape accusation is just a woman having regrets afterwards, but I find it hard to believe that the adult victims of these men (and note that sometimes the victims are boys, too, if that weighs more heavily with you) are just making it up when they say that what they "consented" to when they were children is not something they should have been allowed to consent to.
Now you may protest "I'm only talking about 15-year-olds, not 5-year-olds!" And, fair enough. Except that once we accept your arguments for why young men should not be denied the pleasures of a 15-year-old, you really don't have much except vaguely-defined "physical and mental development" to argue against going much younger. (There are children who go through very precocious puberty. Should they be on the menu?)
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
19hr ago
Why are all the guys so eager to fuck teenage girls also so insistent that these girls be virgins?
Serious question, bub: You keep talking about your "lived experience." So I assume you are not a virgin. I'm not going to ask if you've ever banged an underage girl, but I am going to ask: assuming you have had sex with a virgin, why didn't you marry her?
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
21hr ago
Your entire argument is predicated on your ability to read a poster's intent better than we can.
There are few people whose judgment would cause me to second-guess my own, and you aren't one of them.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
23hr ago
Elsewhere in the thread I said I supported a "common law age of consent," where the aptitude for consent is judged by a jury in a trial that charges rape or sexual assault, where the prosecutor brings evidence that the victim lacks mental capacity.
So could a 22-year-old claim she was statutorily raped and force a trial to establish she was competent to consent?
The problem here is that most cases over 15 result in serious harm to a man, and little to no harm to the girl.
Ah. There it is.
while also causing positive externalities like the expansion of young male dating pools, increases in young marriage and increases in the TFR
I don't think adding 15-year-olds to the dating pool will actually solve the dating woes of young people. Do you think suddenly young men will be locking down teen virgins before they start looking for older chads too?
The issue is therefore asymmetrical; an age of consent of 18 is plausibly far less optimal than an age of consent of 15, when it comes to the amount of harm and negative externalities either causes.
This assumes you don't believe 15-year-olds impregnated by older men are "negative externalities."
Your mathematical approach assumes a spherical and symmetrical world, which sexual relations surely is not.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
23hr ago
I don't find this argument convincing. Your entire premise is that 15 is arbitrary and most 15-year-olds (according to you) are physically and mentally mature enough while most 10-year-olds are not. This might be true. But it's clearly a sliding scale: some (very tiny) number of 10-year-olds probably are physically and mentally mature enough, while there are a not-insignificant number of 15-year-olds who definitely are not.
Every age-of-consent argument boils down to this: yes, the number we choose is somewhat arbitrary. You're saying 18 is too old but 14 is too young. You may or may not be correct, but there will always be someone saying "Aktually most 14-year-olds nowadays..."
While I wouldn't lose sleep over lowering the AOC to 15, nor am I losing sleep over it being 18. And I would pretty seriously side-eye a grown man with a 15-year-old girlfriend, however full of hip and round of breast she might be.
(Also, I think you probably are our previous ebophile poster.)
Your link doesn't work. I'm unfiltering this, but I'll be honest, "Read this attached document before responding" is rather demanding for someone who just created a new account to post a manifesto.
More options
Context Copy link