|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 13, 2018 0:53:52 GMT
The benefit to society by the way is that we don't prohibit people from doing things they consent to doing (when those people are capable of consent --getting rid of an age of consent doesn't imply that one thinks that two-year-olds are capable of consent). Re the other thing, people making incorrect assumptions isn't my problem. It rather just undermines those folks' critical thinking abilities. So I'm usually happy to let it sit because of that, happy to let folks be hoisted by their own petard, even if I'm the only one to realize it. It's their responsibility to be brighter than that. Are you saying that people are not able to consent until they graduate college? High school? How exactly do you define "capable" of consenting? I've posted my detailed criteria for consent many times, including earlier in this thread. I don't expect you to search for it. Would you like me to post it again?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 13, 2018 0:55:50 GMT
LOL whoooooooosh!!!!!!!!!!Do you want to be an asshole or do you want to have a serious discussion? I was merely pointing out that the point I was making went totally over your head. This IS a serious discussion. You should see what happens when I get 'silly'!
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 13, 2018 0:58:09 GMT
Do you want to be an asshole or do you want to have a serious discussion? I was merely pointing out that the point I was making went totally over your head. This IS a serious discussion. You should see what happens when I get 'silly'! No, you're being an asshole. And why would you think that my comment would be subservient to your point?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 13, 2018 1:04:52 GMT
I was merely pointing out that the point I was making went totally over your head. This IS a serious discussion. You should see what happens when I get 'silly'! No, you're being an asshole. And why would you think that my comment would be subservient to your point? ...because it was obvious? Now I would like to do the honour of quoting Planet Arlon ...hence why I think that your view of a single intellectual notion of having age disassociated with consent is both unworkable and illogical in the overall setting of sociology, biology and psychology and is simplistic, convoluted, illogical and in some cases dangerous in setting workable laws, standards and penalties in the complex arena of sexual consent.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 13, 2018 1:05:51 GMT
goz Also the part you repeated and bolded is something I specifically addressed. You completely ignored what I said there. If you want to have a serious discussion and not just be an asshole you don't quote what I said, ignore it, and then just repost the comment again.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 13, 2018 1:09:36 GMT
No, you're being an asshole. And why would you think that my comment would be subservient to your point? ...because it was obvious? Now I would like to do the honour of quoting Planet Arlon ...hence why I think that your view of a single intellectual notion of having age disassociated with consent is both unworkable and illogical in the overall setting of sociology, biology and psychology and is simplistic, convoluted, illogical and in some cases dangerous in setting workable laws, standards and penalties in the complex arena of sexual consent. What? You're saying that my comment would be subservient to your point because it's obvious? I can explain exactly how enforcement of my law would work, and I addressed this above a bit in a response to IslandMur that no one commented on. Folks just ignore stuff and move on to other parts of their telemarketing script because they just want to argue for its own sake.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 13, 2018 1:12:15 GMT
...because it was obvious? Now I would like to do the honour of quoting Planet Arlon ...hence why I think that your view of a single intellectual notion of having age disassociated with consent is both unworkable and illogical in the overall setting of sociology, biology and psychology and is simplistic, convoluted, illogical and in some cases dangerous in setting workable laws, standards and penalties in the complex arena of sexual consent. What? You're saying that my comment would be subservient to your point because it's obvious? I can explain exactly how enforcement of my law would work, and I addressed this above a bit in a response to IslandMur that no one commented on. Folks just ignore stuff and move on to other parts of their telemarketing script because they just want to argue for its own sake. You mean this incomprehensible gibberish?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 13, 2018 2:13:04 GMT
What? You're saying that my comment would be subservient to your point because it's obvious? I can explain exactly how enforcement of my law would work, and I addressed this above a bit in a response to IslandMur that no one commented on. Folks just ignore stuff and move on to other parts of their telemarketing script because they just want to argue for its own sake. You mean this incomprehensible gibberish? If I write something that you don't understand, you don't just blow by it, essentially ignoring it. Ask me to explain it, reword it, etc. So, rewording that/explaining it in a more verbose way: Let's say that there's a complex maturity issue, where there's a state, at some point in an individual's development, that counts as that individual finally being mature enough to consent to sex, and prior to which the individual is not mature enough to consent to sex. Let's call that state M. Okay, so incorporating that into my approach to the criteria of consent, where we're framing consent on ability to consent and not on age, M is a requirement for the ability to consent. In other words, when some individual reaches the M stage of their development, they're capable of consenting (assuming they've also met the other criteria), but prior to M, they're not capable of consenting. M is part of the ability to consent. M is not separate from the ability to consent. Thus M is not more complex than the ability to consent. M is part of the ability to consent.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 13, 2018 2:15:40 GMT
You mean this incomprehensible gibberish? If I write something that you don't understand, you don't just blow by it, essentially ignoring it. Ask me to explain it, reword it, etc. So, rewording that/explaining it in a more verbose way: Let's say that there's a complex maturity issue, where there's a state, at some point in an individual's development, that counts as that individual finally being mature enough to consent to sex, and prior to which the individual is not mature enough to consent to sex. Let's call that state M. Okay, so incorporating that into my approach to the criteria of consent, where we're framing consent on ability to consent and not on age, M is a requirement for the ability to consent. In other words, when some individual reaches the M stage of their development, they're capable of consenting (assuming they've also met the other criteria), but prior to M, they're not capable of consenting. M is part of the ability to consent. M is not separate from the ability to consent. Thus M is not more complex than the ability to consent. M is part of the ability to consent. Great. M is mature enough to consent to sex no matter their age ( says you). How is that ascertained? validated and mandated?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 13, 2018 2:23:23 GMT
If I write something that you don't understand, you don't just blow by it, essentially ignoring it. Ask me to explain it, reword it, etc. So, rewording that/explaining it in a more verbose way: Let's say that there's a complex maturity issue, where there's a state, at some point in an individual's development, that counts as that individual finally being mature enough to consent to sex, and prior to which the individual is not mature enough to consent to sex. Let's call that state M. Okay, so incorporating that into my approach to the criteria of consent, where we're framing consent on ability to consent and not on age, M is a requirement for the ability to consent. In other words, when some individual reaches the M stage of their development, they're capable of consenting (assuming they've also met the other criteria), but prior to M, they're not capable of consenting. M is part of the ability to consent. M is not separate from the ability to consent. Thus M is not more complex than the ability to consent. M is part of the ability to consent. Great. M is mature enough to consent to sex no matter their age ( says you). How is that ascertained? validated and mandated? No matter their age, but "matter their M." It's ascertained by us knowing just what we're referring to by M, in terms of behavioral criteria (including things like verbal statements). When that's ascertained is when there's a claim of a consent violation. At that point, just like now, just as with our current laws, we launch an investigation. Part of the investigation is determining if the putative victim has reached M.
|
|
islandmur
Sophomore
All religions have messages of peace and love yet all religions are used for wars and hatred...
@islandmur
Posts: 320
Likes: 180
|
Post by islandmur on Jun 13, 2018 2:31:18 GMT
How's about M be finished puberty? like say around 15-17?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 13, 2018 2:37:19 GMT
How's about M be finished puberty? like say around 15-17? I would just ask us to (a) detail just what physically counts as being "finished with puberty" and (b) support why we believe that should be the requirement (and not with vague jargon like "because one isn't 'ready for ' sex prior to that point," but a detailed description of the physical and/or behavioral criteria that would work as a demarcation criterion and why it should be a demarcation criterion) Also, the demarcation criteria and the reasoning for it needs to be consistent with other things we are going to allow and disallow.
|
|
islandmur
Sophomore
All religions have messages of peace and love yet all religions are used for wars and hatred...
@islandmur
Posts: 320
Likes: 180
|
Post by islandmur on Jun 13, 2018 2:40:25 GMT
Why do you think a body goes through puberty? What is the function of Puberty?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 13, 2018 2:43:35 GMT
Why do you think a body goes through puberty? What is the function of Puberty? There is no why in that sense factually. Aside from our thinking about it this way, the world isn't actually teleological (goal/purpose-oriented) in any sense. The only factual "why" is a description of the causal physical mechanisms involved.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 13, 2018 2:54:46 GMT
Great. M is mature enough to consent to sex no matter their age ( says you). How is that ascertained? validated and mandated? No matter their age, but "matter their M." It's ascertained by us knowing just what we're referring to by M, in terms of behavioral criteria (including things like verbal statements). When that's ascertained is when there's a claim of a consent violation. At that point, just like now, just as with our current laws, we launch an investigation. Part of the investigation is determining if the putative victim has reached M. Got it...so there is no deterrent to predators as long as the child can be coaxed to say they have given consent? After the event is NOT good enough. This is patently ridiculous and you know it. The REAL issue of knowledge and consent is necessarily WAY more complex than your simplistic nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Jun 13, 2018 3:01:54 GMT
The things is everyone understands what we are saying including you. But you have to show off? We are not in a classroom, we are not in a proffessors meeting. We are in a chat forum, where common speech is used. is/oughts... what's the meaning of.... what do you mean by... ect.. are just you are utter non sense in the context of this discussion because you know darn well what is meant. So if you disagree with something just say it... There are people out there having sex with 8 month old babies. There are people out there having sex with 2 year olds, 6 year olds, 8 year olds, ect... Yes an abitrary line has been drawn, based on studies and insights into children psychology and physiology to indicate when children are permitted to have sex. It's not sex with adults by the way... it's sex. Just when I think this place is utterly hopeless. Thank you for being alive.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 13, 2018 3:03:51 GMT
No matter their age, but "matter their M." It's ascertained by us knowing just what we're referring to by M, in terms of behavioral criteria (including things like verbal statements). When that's ascertained is when there's a claim of a consent violation. At that point, just like now, just as with our current laws, we launch an investigation. Part of the investigation is determining if the putative victim has reached M. Got it...so there is no deterrent to predators as long as the child can be coaxed to say they have given consent? This comment seems to be ignoring both what you're quoting immediately above and what I wrote earlier re my criteria. Are you ignoring both and presenting a straw man on purpose? There's much more to it than someone "saying that they have given consent." The deterrent is that if someone is not able to give consent and you molest them, you'll face the legal penalties. That's just the same as now. How do you suppose that we do things now, under current laws, so that we're not dealing with molestation victims after the event?
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jun 13, 2018 3:58:00 GMT
Terrapin StationSo let me try to understand your position one more time. I am not even interested in understanding whether paedophilia is morally right or wrong. You believe in consent based approach to sex. According to you if a child gives consent to an adult to have sex with him/her then there should be no law punishing the adult for having sex with the child. Am I correct?
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jun 13, 2018 4:21:09 GMT
I am not sure what you mean by baby. I will like you to make it clear would you consider a person who has penetrative sex with 4 year old kids to have mental issues? Are you fine with people allowed by law to have sex with 4 year old as long as the 4 year old has given consent? I responded to the question as was asked and the example given was baby. Ok, Cool. I believe that your position is that paedophilia is a misuse of sexuality and something close to mental illness if not full fledged mental illness. Am I right?
Many times on these boards people get all heated up and do not address things that need to be addressed and get a bit too complicated and philosophical. May be even I am occasionally doing that.
However, when it comes to children and sex, I have a very simple stance. I am not in the least concerned whether actions are right or wrong. All I am concerned is whether there is a law to protect children or not. So just to confirm your position on this. Do you think there should be a law that stops adults from having consensual sex with children? Let's say pre-teen children.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jun 13, 2018 4:29:55 GMT
Ok, Cool. I believe that your position is that paedophilia is a misuse of sexuality and something close to mental illness if not full fledged mental illness. Am I right?
Many times on these boards people get all heated up and do not address things that need to be addressed and get a bit too complicated and philosophical. May be even I am occasionally doing that.
However, when it comes to children and sex, I have a very simple stance. I am not in the least concerned whether actions are right or wrong. All I am concerned is whether there is a law to protect children or not. So just to confirm your position on this. Do you think there should be a law that stops adults from having sex with children? Let's say pre-teen children.
Yes and Yes.
Prepubescent children, have the right to protection from adults taking sexual advantage of them and in the technical sense of the term, that is what pedophilia represents.
I am totally in agreement with you. (I had made a slight edit in my previous post I hope your answer stays the same even after my edit).
I hope you are all fine and happy with Toastedcheese's position.
|
|