MrDarwin

I didn't.

bonduca

AtlanticCitySlave, please state what your credentials are and how you are qualified to make these statements. Please list what degrees you hold, your professional affiliations and experience in the field of social work, psychology, medicine, or even education.

Otherwise, I will assume that you are making excuses for this sort of behavior, as in "women like rough sex, so they enjoy rape," and will draw the conclusion that you are simply some sort of deranged and pathetic troll.

MrDarwin

Bonduca, I suspect AtlanticCitySlave has one at least one qualification that you don't have: he was once a 10-year-old boy. So was I, so were a lot of guys I know. Anybody who thinks 10 year old boys aren't thinking about sex, and that at least some of these boys wouldn't happily engage in sexual activity given the least bit of encouragement, is living in a fool's paradise.

Again, whether acting on those urges is right or good or sensible is the topic of another discussion. But I think everybody is responding rather hysterically to ACS's main point, which is that some children do indeed want to have sex, and some of them would have sex given half a chance. I think it's foolish to dismiss out of hand the fact that some children do indeed have sex, do it willingly, and do it with pleasure. Our society tends to lump everything under headings like "sexual abuse", "child molestation", or "statutory rape" when there are very, very different things going on.

And since this is such a hot-button topic, I probably need to add that I never engaged in sexual activity of any kind until I was 20 (I was a late bloomer) and I have never engaged in sexual activity of any kind with a minor.

One of the last sane

Whether or not the boys wanted it is irrelevant, IMO. It was still wrong to give them what they wanted. A ten year old boy might want all sorts of stupid things: to drink himself into an alcoholic coma, drive an army tank down Main Street, throw a match in a fireworks factory, who knows what. The whole point is that at that age their judgement is not good enough for them to be just given what they want.

bonduca

That only qualifies him to say what he felt at ten years of age. Pending his disclosure of other credentials or reasearch he is not an expert on what is good or healthy for other children, nor whether or not they can be psychologically harmed by sexual exploitation by adults.


I have neither said nor implied that. However, as a child I would have also liked to marry Sean Connery, smoke cigarettes, drink a gallon of brandy, eat candy for every meal, and shoot my horrible cousin. Any adult who would have encouraged me to act on such things would have been a dangerous and unhealthy influence.

Acting on those urges will get an adult brought up on criminal charges.

I don't feel I've been hysterical. I have asked for his qualifications to make such declarations.


This makes sexual experimentation with each other a natural thing. It does not make them potential dates for predatory adults who are unable to relate to their peers.

A sexual relationship between, say, a ten-year-old child and a 30-year-old adult is considered by our society to be sexual exploitation. There is an enormous disparity in power between a child and an adult, despite depictions of the all-knowing Lolita stereotype.

Geez, I don't care if you and the girl(or boy) next door played doctor every day, as long as she was your peer.

The issue is not whether or not children have sexual feelings, but whether or not adults have the right to use their power and status as adults to exploit children for their own sexual pleasure.

[ June 16, 2002: Message edited by: bonduca ]</p>

AtlanticCitySlave

Hi again…

First, just because I may disagree with some of you, it doesn’t mean I’m a troll, even if I say something you find repulsive. We all obviously have our opinions on matters, especially this one (especially if we’ve been abused in the past), but the tone of the conversation is hardly civil. I don’t think I, or MrDarwin, have written in such a way that we are “sick” or anything along those lines. So, if everyone doesn’t mind, I think we should stop the name calling and maybe just talk.

Second, I’m not sure what my “credentials” have anything to do with, and I’m not sure why Bonduca even posted what she did. The language being used is loaded. What I have said is not “rape”, it’s not someone being “molested”, or any of these negative (and violent) labels put on certain people’s behavior. It’s also rather silly to assume if I don’t list my credentials that I’m a deranged troll or what not. You may want to play “what’s that fallacy?” and figure out what one you made. My degrees, affiliations, etc., are my business.

Third, Queen of Swords again did the same thing, and since I don’t read what she writes, I’ll simply ask anyone who cares to read my first post concerning her.

Fourth, no one said that at 10 years old a person should simply be able to do whatever they want. The only said was that it wouldn’t be that odd if some of the boys/children did want it (sex/fooling around) with a priest. Drinking to a coma is obviously not a good idea for a child (it will harm him/her). I’m not sure what the army tank example really means. And throwing a match in a fireworks factory wouldn’t be allowed as well, since it will potentially harm other people, destroy goods, etc. But, we would ideally not allow anyone to do such things, although there would be exceptions of course (we don’t care if the person drinks themselves to a coma, the person is in the army and ordered to drive a tank, etc.) As MrDarwin pointed out, and as many others would, it isn’t necessarily the case that it’s bad/harmful for a child to have sex, fool around, or “pet” at a young age. Again, it’s very common in other cultures. In fact, there is at least one culture I know of that a boy isn’t considered a man until let’s another man perform anal sex on him. What I know of this culture, there are no overall harmful effects as the result of this.
I certainly agree that a ten year old child (or younger), should not just be given what they want. I just challenge the idea that we can assume that all of these boys didn’t want it. It seems to me the priest may not be all lies. However, I also would say that almost no one should be given whatever they want.

Fifth, and to wrap up, if a young boy wanted sex, or sexual contact from a priest, and agreed, it would, by definition, not be a molestation. To be molested involves forced sexual contact. I also wouldn’t want a ten inch penis shoved up my ass/anus, so for that to happen to me it would be wrong (obviously), but the difference is that some boys may want just that.


(While I was writing this post, Bonduca wrote another one. I don't see much to respond to. Again, my credentials have nothing to do with the conversation. You can go to any college library and do a psychinfo search, look up cross-cultural studies, etc. It's pretty common knowledge that other cultures have sexual relationships with their young, and it's been brought up in these forums before. I don't need to say "hey, i got my doctorate from such and such university" to get my point across.
And, your language is again loaded, in that you assume the adults "exploit" the children.)

[ June 16, 2002: Message edited by: AtlanticCitySlave ]</p>

Goliath

Warren Sinden,

I had no such fantasies when I was 10.

Sincerely,

Goliath

bonduca

Slave-

Perhaps you could answer a few questions for me:

How are you qualified to say what will or will not have long-term harmful effects on children, or what might be policy for social workers dealing with such cases, or if such policy as you have described is in the best interests of the children? If it is only your best guess or opinion, I would simply like to know.

If these children were not harmed by this sexual behavior, why have so many of them later, as adults, sued the Catholic church and these priests?

Would this not indicate that informed consent was not freely given? And if this does not constitute exploitation, please give your definition of what does.

Thank you.

Queen of Swords

Originally posted by AtlanticCitySlave:
<strong>
Second, I’m not sure what my “credentials” have anything to do with, and I’m not sure why Bonduca even posted what she did. </strong>

If you make factual statements, I know I at least would like to know what the reasoning or evidence is for those facts.

<strong>Third, Queen of Swords again did the same thing, and since I don’t read what she writes, I’ll simply ask anyone who cares to read my first post concerning her.</strong>

Again, this is no doubt very convenient for you, since not only do I tend to reply carefully to posts such as yours, I also ask questions that you might not able to answer. Keep evading the issues, Slave; it might be difficult for you to consider such aspects as :

1. Is there some screening process/experiment by which one can tell which children like this sort of contact and which don't?

2. Is 10 an appropriate cut-off age for adults to consider sexual activity with children, in your opinion?

<strong>As MrDarwin pointed out, and as many others would, it isn’t necessarily the case that it’s bad/harmful for a child to have sex, fool around, or “pet” at a young age. </strong>

I don't think he was referring to sexual contact between an adult and a child.

<strong>In fact, there is at least one culture I know of that a boy isn’t considered a man until let’s another man perform anal sex on him. What I know of this culture, there are no overall harmful effects as the result of this.</strong>

Why should we apply the standards of some mysterious, as yet unnamed culture to ours?

<strong>I just challenge the idea that we can assume that all of these boys didn’t want it.</strong>

Please explain your criteria (if you can) for determining whether or not a child wants sexual contact with an adult.

<strong>Fifth, and to wrap up, if a young boy wanted sex, or sexual contact from a priest, and agreed, it would, by definition, not be a molestation.</strong>

Again, could you show what percentage of children decide that they wish to have sexual contact with a priest and make their wishes explicitly clear to the priest?

I don't think you can, but feel free to try.

Veil of Fire

ACS:
(A) If you make factual statements, I know I at least would like to know what the reasoning or evidence is for those facts.

(B) (Re: Not Replying to Someone) Again, this is no doubt very convenient for you, since not only does she tend to reply carefully to posts such as yours, she also asks questions that you might not able to answer. Keep evading the issues, Slave; it might be difficult for you to consider such aspects as:

1. Is there some screening process/experiment by which one can tell which children like this sort of contact and which don't?

2. Is 10 an appropriate cut-off age for adults to consider sexual activity with children, in your opinion?

(C) (Re: 'petting')I don't think he was referring to sexual contact between an adult and a child.

(D) (Re: 'Culture') Why should we apply the standards of some mysterious, as yet unnamed culture to ours?

(E) (Re: Some boys wanted to be forced to perform oral sex on a priest) Please explain your criteria (if you can) for determining whether or not a child wants sexual contact with an adult.

(F) (Re: Not molestation for a priest to stick his penis in a boy's mouth if the kid didn't knoe enough to say 'no!') Again, could you show what percentage of children decide that they wish to have sexual contact with a priest and make their wishes explicitly clear to the priest?

I don't think you can, but feel free to try.

***

QoS: Just a bit of help so maybe he'll actually address those points.