Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lunachick · 02-25-2003, 05:28 PM

As for the assertion that a child may benefit in some way by being seduced or coerced into sex with an adult, I'd like to know HOW? What is the basis of such an assertion?

Fr.Andrew · 02-25-2003, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lunachick
Molest:
Main Entry: mo�lest
Pronunciation: m&-'lest
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French molester, from Latin molestare, from molestus burdensome, annoying; akin to Latin moles mass
Date: 14th century
1 : to annoy, disturb, or persecute especially with hostile intent or injurious effect
2 : to make annoying sexual advances to; especially : to force physical and usually sexual contact on
- mo�les�ta�tion /"mO-"les-'tA-sh&n, "m�-, -l&s-/ noun
- mo�lest�er /m&-'les-t&r/ noun

(Fr Andrew): So if there's nothing burdensome or annoying or injurious to either party (I suppose it's implied, but I'd add "coercive"), no molestation has occured?
Are we justified in the assumption that any inter-generational sexual contact is molestation?
In your opinion?

Fr.Andrew · 02-25-2003, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lunachick
As for the assertion that a child may benefit in some way by being seduced or coerced into sex with an adult, I'd like to know HOW? What is the basis of such an assertion?

(Fr Andrew): I can't imagine. Who has said such a thing?

Odemus · 02-25-2003, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fr.Andrew
(Odemus): "The idea of mutual consent between adults and children regarding sex does not apply. There is only a predator/prey relationship, period end of story."
(Fr Andrew): This is probably the sort of closed-minded approach to things that has caused people to confuse you with a Christian.

As I said this is a subject outside the realm of academic theory. As responsible adults who care about our communities and our children we have a moral obligation to condemn pedophilia in the strongest possible terms.This Totalitarianist mug may simply be having fun roleplaying a Catholic priest for his own amusement, but at the same time he could very well be the next child predator in your neighbourhood, and only started this thread to find justification for living out some twisted fantasy. Are you willing to live with the possibility that you may be giving someone positive reinforcement to endager the welfare of children?

Maybe I'm overly dramatic, maybe not. One thing is for sure-I'm shocked that there are people willing to debate whether or not there are acceptable circumstances for adults to have sex with children. WTF!

lunachick · 02-26-2003, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fr.Andrew
(Fr Andrew): I can't imagine. Who has said such a thing?

From here:

Quote:

(Fr Andrew): There isn't that I've seen. On this or any other board. There has been an attempt to twist something I said to make it sound that way, though. Here's what I said:
"I can imagine circumstances under which a physical relationship with an adult neighbor or friend may be the only source of nurturing that a child gets..."
To those interested, the circumstances that I imagined as I wrote that, were:
"...a kid living in a trailor in Nasty Gulch WVA or some such place with a single, careless, neglectful mother and no source for compassion or love."
All my remarks on the subject are in two closed threads on the Misc Forum, should anyone care to read them in context.
The notion that sex between children and adults is always, in every case, harmful to the child, is simply incorrect...at least according to what I've read here and here...

...I go on record as preferring that a neglected child be comforted non-sexually whenever possible. If not possible, however, I'd like to see a neglected child comforted. Not "abused", not "harmed", not "used", not "exploited"--comforted.

And from here:

Quote:

Originally posted by Fr.Andrew
(Linda): For those who think that there could be a benefit in any adult committing any sexual interaction with a child, please do explain exactly what scenario would give such a benefit.
(Fr Andrew): I suppose that means me. ;-)
To be honest, when I wrote that I had in my mind's eye a kid living in a trailor in Nasty Gulch WVA or some such place with a single, careless, neglectful mother and no source for compassion or love. But I suppose you could find the same sort of situation in an inner-city ghetto or in the backwoods of Maine.
Under such circumstances, I can imagine a child benefitting emotionally from the physical attentions of an adult. I'm sorry...I do.

[fixed links - 99%]

Fr.Andrew · 02-26-2003, 03:22 AM

(Fr Andrew): That's all very nice, and I stand by every word I wrote...but your statement seemed to indicate that someone had suggested that "a child may benefit in some way by being seduced or coerced into sex with an adult" (emphasis mine)
Do you have some instance where I have said (or anyone has said) that ? Or not?
I don't advocate coercion--I'm not into rape. And I don't advocate intergenerational sex. I made that plain over and over in the threads you've resurrected but apparently haven't read...and I made that point to you in an email which you promised to answer and never did.
I've simply said that it is not the case that a every child is automatically harmed by intergenerational sex (that's borne out by the study I linked)...and that I can imagine circumstances under which physical attention from an older person may actually benefit a lonely child.

Fr.Andrew · 02-26-2003, 03:29 AM

(Odemus): Maybe I'm overly dramatic, maybe not. One thing is for sure-I'm shocked that there are people willing to debate whether or not there are acceptable circumstances for adults to have sex with children.
(Fr Andrew): Willingness to debate an issue is a sign of an open mind.
Discussion of intergenerational sex is not the same as an endorsement of child abuse.

dangin · 02-26-2003, 06:20 AM

If you want to give positive attention to a child, take them fishing, or to a ballgame, or to the library.

But the idea that having a sexual relationship with someone who has not reached sexual maturity might be the only "positive" thing in that minor's life is really (I can't think of a good adjective) stupefying.

When you need to insert your penis, tongue, fingers, or foreign object into a child's orifices and you are receiving sexual gratification from it, then even if the question is not "What harm is befalling the child?", the question should at least be "Why can't you have a relationship with an adult and do these things?"

What is the fucked up, lack of perspective that makes a person of physical adulthood, shun other adults, and seek out children as sex partners? I'd have to say that that person has mentally failed to reach adulthood themselves and can only relate to children. Which is all the more frightening, because we are essentially dealing with a adult, with a child's lack of restraint.

HelenM · 02-26-2003, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dangin
When you need to insert your penis, tongue, fingers, or foreign object into a child's orifices and you are receiving sexual gratification from it, then even if the question is not "What harm is befalling the child?", the question should at least be "Why can't you have a relationship with an adult and do these things?"

Another good question, imo, is: "It's clear what you get out of doing such things. What does the child get out of it that they would not get out of simply spending time together in an activity other than one which many people are convinced is harmful to the child (regardless of whether the child 'seems' to like it or not)?"

Maybe the answer to your question, dangin is that it's easier to get a child's consent than an adult's

for what I believe is essentially a very selfish act of self-gratification.

Helen

Fr.Andrew · 02-26-2003, 08:37 AM

(dangin): But the idea that having a sexual relationship with someone who has not reached sexual maturity might be the only "positive" thing in that minor's life is really (I can't think of a good adjective) stupefying."
(Fr Andrew): I haven't read anyone make that assertion, either. I really don't understand what it is about the subject of intergenerational sex that encourages otherwise rational people toward the construction of strawmen.

View Poll Results: Is man-boy love right or wrong?
It is always right	1	1.20%
It is always wrong	60	72.29%
It is sometimes right, and sometimes wrong	22	26.51%
Voters: 83. You may not vote on this poll

02-26-2003, 03:22 AM	#76
Fr.Andrew Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Betsy's Bluff, Maine Posts: 540	for lunachick (Fr Andrew): That's all very nice, and I stand by every word I wrote...but your statement seemed to indicate that someone had suggested that "a child may benefit in some way by being seduced or coerced into sex with an adult" (emphasis mine) Do you have some instance where I have said (or anyone has said) that ? Or not? I don't advocate coercion--I'm not into rape. And I don't advocate intergenerational sex. I made that plain over and over in the threads you've resurrected but apparently haven't read...and I made that point to you in an email which you promised to answer and never did. I've simply said that it is not the case that a every child is automatically harmed by intergenerational sex (that's borne out by the study I linked)...and that I can imagine circumstances under which physical attention from an older person may actually benefit a lonely child.

02-26-2003, 03:29 AM	#77
Fr.Andrew Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Betsy's Bluff, Maine Posts: 540	for Odemus (Odemus): Maybe I'm overly dramatic, maybe not. One thing is for sure-I'm shocked that there are people willing to debate whether or not there are acceptable circumstances for adults to have sex with children. (Fr Andrew): Willingness to debate an issue is a sign of an open mind. Discussion of intergenerational sex is not the same as an endorsement of child abuse.

02-26-2003, 08:37 AM	#80
Fr.Andrew Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Betsy's Bluff, Maine Posts: 540	for Dangin (dangin): But the idea that having a sexual relationship with someone who has not reached sexual maturity might be the only "positive" thing in that minor's life is really (I can't think of a good adjective) stupefying." (Fr Andrew): I haven't read anyone make that assertion, either. I really don't understand what it is about the subject of intergenerational sex that encourages otherwise rational people toward the construction of strawmen.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-25-2003, 05:28 PM	#71
lunachick Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: NZ Posts: 7,895	As for the assertion that a child may benefit in some way by being seduced or coerced into sex with an adult, I'd like to know HOW? What is the basis of such an assertion?

02-26-2003, 06:20 AM	#78
dangin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: The Middle, Kansas Posts: 2,637	If you want to give positive attention to a child, take them fishing, or to a ballgame, or to the library. But the idea that having a sexual relationship with someone who has not reached sexual maturity might be the only "positive" thing in that minor's life is really (I can't think of a good adjective) stupefying. When you need to insert your penis, tongue, fingers, or foreign object into a child's orifices and you are receiving sexual gratification from it, then even if the question is not "What harm is befalling the child?", the question should at least be "Why can't you have a relationship with an adult and do these things?" What is the fucked up, lack of perspective that makes a person of physical adulthood, shun other adults, and seek out children as sex partners? I'd have to say that that person has mentally failed to reach adulthood themselves and can only relate to children. Which is all the more frightening, because we are essentially dealing with a adult, with a child's lack of restraint.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.