Vampire-Werewolf hybrid sexually assaults teen girl

[Broomstick]

14, 15 - not a fuck of a lot of difference. Not a fuck of a lot of difference between last year of middle school and first year of high school. That slight bump in age in no way changes my stance.

I know, but it suggests to me that you probably barely read the article before replying. Funny, that. You do have a knack for the sanctimonious.

Yeah, I do.

Here's a napkin to wipe the froth off your mouth and chin.

I realize young men don't want to believe mid-teen girls/women can be naive because it helps to justify their less savory behavior but it's true. Biology can be fucking unfair, and unfair in fucking. Female humans in that age range ARE extremely vulnerable to manipulation, even when otherwise intelligent and educated.

If you think I like to fuck underage girls and am trying to justify it, why don't you just say it? Because this is total fucking horseshit.

Frankly, I have no clue what you like to fuck, and zero interest in finding out. Men, women, goats... really, I don't care. As long as no one is getting needlessly hurt.

Makes me wonder why you took such a general statement so personally. When you went off about sexism in regards to female sexuality on SD.net you didn't see me launch into feminazi mode, did you?

Young men failing to understand young women is just as much a problem as overprotectiveness of young women. It has a variety of manifestations, probably the least toxic of which is young men getting pissed off because young women have no clue why their sexually mature appearance combined with "fashionable" clothing is driving the young men nuts. If you assume a woman in her mid-teens dropping her pants for an older man she barely knows to fuck her is fully cognizant of what she is doing I think you have not quite comprehended the problem with this scenario.

Nothing about what I said implies that he should be OFF THE HOOK because she has sexual impulses in her own right, only that treating this as a problem of lost honor on the part of the innocent young girl ignores a key problem which must be addressed which is realistic education and psychological treatment which takes into account the girl's realistic sexual desire.

And nowhere did I suggest "throwing the book" at this man. I never discussed this young woman's "honor" at any point. I have serious concerns that she is sexually inadequately educated and is easily manipulated, but that's not "honor", that's worry that someone is being taken advantage of or in a position to be victimized.

Yes, she has sexual desire. That doesn't mean she should act on it, particularly with a stranger. If you aren't free to say "no" as well as "yes" you aren't really free to make a choice.

My first concern is that we have someone who appears to be a whacko willing to overlook inconvenient laws for his own personal gratification. It could be that he is not a danger to himself or others, but the matter needs to be looked into. It's perfectly legal and (well, sort of) OK to believe yourself to be a vampwolf so long as you don't use it to hurt people or justify breaking the law. It's weird, but it may be harmless. On the other hand, I do have concerns about someone willing to deliberately flout the law regardless of whether or not he's a crazy. As other people have pointed out in this thread, the average young man is well aware of what statutory rape is and is concerned with avoiding fucking jailbait no matter how horny he is. This guy is not normal. It's OK to be weird, but not OK to be weird and dangerous. I'm not sure which category he belongs to.

A secondary concern is the girl - as I have said repeatedly, having her drop her panties to older strangers is a bad situation. At the very least, if she was my kid, I'd get her checked for STD's, pregnancy tested, and into some re-education on the biological facts of fucking. This would probably be followed up by some sort of counseling (for damn sure, she'd be pissed at any parent who had done that much up to that point) and I'd keep a closer watch on her activities. There IS a danger that she could be chasing after older men, either oblivious to or uncaring of the legal trouble she could get them into for fucking her. Men being victimized by user women is just as ugly as the reverse.

[Darth Wong]

The guy is a scumbag, but the girl is no innocent either. And the fact is that in many jurisdictions, it would be perfectly legal to have sex with a 15 year old girl. It's not as if she would miraculously become far more mature if one more year passes.

I have serious concerns that she is sexually inadequately educated and is easily manipulated, but that's not "honor", that's worry that someone is being taken advantage of or in a position to be victimized.

There are plenty of girls out there who have inadequate knowledge. That is a problem with society, government, education, and religion. But I don't see how it is relevant here. Would her whole personality change if another year passed and she turned 16? There are plenty of 18 year old girls who are easily manipulated too; every university student knows that the high school senior girls are easily manipulated. Perhaps we should raise the age of consent to 30?

[Broomstick]

Since I am a woman (the fact I graduated high school a quarter century ago being largely irrelevant) I think I am in a better position than you to evaluate the effects of horniess and hormones on a teen girl. These days it's not at all uncommon for girls - and they are girls - in the 10-12 age range to be physically mature but they sure as hell aren't emotionally or mentally mature. They've got an accelerator but no brakes. They aren't capable of making an informed choice about sex because they don't have the mature ability to reason that an 18 or 20 year old does (even they aren't completely mature, but they're further along at least).

I don't know why you insist on filling space that could be omitted with diatribes on the self-evident.

I bother with it because when I don't people tend to read things into my posts that aren't there. Sometimes, I over-clarify but I'd rather have too much background to avoid misunderstanding than too little.

Do you think I went through High School unaware of why I could not have sex with 10-12 year old girls who looked older?

I don't know - did you? I'd like to think you were smart enough to understand that, but frankly, I don't know you or what you were like in high school.

I do wonder why you are taking general statements so incredibly personal. NOWHERE do I say "you" or "Illuminatus Primus" in talking about these issues. Get a grip, this isn't all about you.

I think there might be some situations where a 19 year old and a 14 year old might be OK (although I can't think of one off-hand) but a 19 year old man has so many advantages over a 14 year old girl that it's not a fair contest. The maturity gap is too great. Maybe, if they had known each other for awhile, if they had progressed from acquaintance to dating to sex over a significant time period, if both sets of parents were aware that they were seeing each other this wouldn't set off alarm bells but, frankly, if a girl that young is fucking men that old after knowing them less than a week I'd say BOTH of those kids have some serious problems.

Exactly, there is texture. Which means we need to know more before arguing about exactly what intervention would be most appropriate and suited toward the needs of both the fifteen year old, and the nineteen year old delusional.

Or he's not delusional, he just thinks that by acting delusional he'll beat a statutory rape charge. As usual, we have one media story that is very short on details. None of us here know the whole story.

Its even possible he recently graduated from High School and she's a grade-ahead-of-age sophomore. I am not saying its likely, but I had peers and classmates who were a full year younger than me (I have a September birthday). We need to know more.

It would be helpful, yes.

However, regardless of class level, the fact remains there is a significant age separation between the two and it (apparently) falls under Pennsylvania (it is Pennsylvania, right?) statutory rape law. I am opposed to mandatory sentencing and mandatory listing on "sexual offender" lists in such cases because so many of them have such gray overtones. This isn't some 70 year old perv seducing high school girls.

My responses were in reaction specifically to Brian's kneejerking and emotional responses and a perceived connection to AYVB puritanism.

But you seem to be conflating Brian's response and mine - I assure you we are two very different people. I expect that he will moderate with age and experience as most people do, and when he is as old as me he'll be just as sanctimonious as I am.

I do not think this guy is a good guy and I do know why young girls are incapable of consenting like young women my age - capeesh?

Yes, but this thread is not a conversation solely between you and me, and thus when I respond I am assuming that others besides you will be reading it - another reason why I tend to "overexplain" myself. I don't assume everyone reading knows me, my posting history, or really anything outside of this thread.

Its a total strawman, I never said anything of the sort, and I resent personally being accused of something like that.

I have not personally accused you of ANYTHING. Well, OK, I don't think you understand young women as well as you think you do, but again, I don't think either gender understands the other that well. Oh - look that's not personal, that's general again.

Anyway, this is all a stone's throw from seniors (18) dating freshman (15 or even 14 if late birthday) which is ubiquitous. If we consider that an unacceptable risk, we need to reform the way we do High School.

Again, as I said, I object to mandatory sentencing and over-strict statutory rape laws precisely because these situations are so variable. But we aren't talking about dating in this situation, unless it is now the norm for high school students to fuck on their first night out together. These two weren't dating, they skipped right over that part and went straight to fucking. This isn't dating, it's a one-night stand.

Are you suggesting I'm a budding statutory rapist?

No. I very much would like to believe you have the self control to never do such a thing and the wit to avoid compromising situations. Why do you feel you're being accused?

I did not say "throw the book at him".

No shit, moron, but you replied to my comments which were particularly constructed in response to Brian - and he DID.

But nowhere did I ever say "I agree with Brian" - I was responding to YOUR words, not his. If you want a private conversation between yourself and one other poster take it to pm's - threads are public and anyone is allowed to comment.

You replied to my arguments

Yes, I did. Is it even remotely possible that how you came across was not how you intended to come across?

and I explained from what perspective they were made.

Yet you are impatient with me explaining my perspective.

The guy is either a manipulative jackass, a nutcase in need of counseling, or possibly both. None of the above is healthy for a 14 year old girl to associate with regardless of what her crotch is telling her.

No shit. I never made that argument. Brain has an attitude and tone like he cannot believe the girl could possibly be sexually interested or assertive with older men until they apparently pull out their ONE HIT TKO I AM A VAMPIRE-WEREWOLF HYBRID PLAYER CARD.

Actually, I've long felt Brian tends to idealize women a bit more than he should, but I have no desire to get into an argument with him about it. You are correct that many woman have a soft spot for older men... which is precisely why female teens need protection from older manipulators. Or sometimes just older dumbfucks. Full adults are supposed to have the self-control to say "NO" in such situations even when both bodies are screaming yes-yes-yes! with hormones.

I am just not sure if throwing him in our prison system is really the way to reduce harm and optimize justice here. I think - especially if we knew more - we could discuss a better alternative for how he could be punished and at what severity.

Neither do I. I fail to understand why you keep lumping me in the "hang-the-bastard!" group.

I do think that if he did violate the statutory rape law some punishment is warranted - I can't mis-park my car without a fine, after all, and that's far less a problem for society that what he did - but as I have repeatedly said I can't agree with some of the draconian laws currently on the books, either.

A 14 year old girl having sex with men she just met is also a bad sign - this girl seriously needs some sex education and/or some counseling or she is going to wind up with some serious on-going issues.

Exactly. Brian was talking from a perspective of "protect the maidens!" moral outrage. That's not a realistic or helpful perspective - the optimal solution of minimizing harm has to take into account this girls (apparently dysfunctional) sexual drives realistically, and address them on realistic terms. Which is why I oppose kneejerk moral outrage reactions.

As I said, Brain is a romantic. The danger in that viewpoint, in believing women to be pure as a default, is that is a potential exploit for user women.

However, he is correct in that this girl needs some protecting until she is re-educated and a backbone is installed.

[Broomstick]

The guy is a scumbag, but the girl is no innocent either. And the fact is that in many jurisdictions, it would be perfectly legal to have sex with a 15 year old girl. It's not as if she would miraculously become far more mature if one more year passes.

Don't know for sure, Mike - teenagers can mature in fits and starts. One year can make a lot of difference during those years.

I'm also interested in what the statutes are in that state. There are a LOT of states in the US where age of consent is under 18, in some jurisdictions it's not just absolute age but also and age spread that is taken into account (so, for instance, a 2 year age difference is allowed but not, say, 6 years). In some states marriage at 15 or 16 is still possible with parental consent... I think knowing the exact law is relevant, as are the possible punishments. I don't feel that what he did warrants a felony on his record since she did consent (even if I feel she was foolish for doing so). On the other hand, what he did was not OK.

I have serious concerns that she is sexually inadequately educated and is easily manipulated, but that's not "honor", that's worry that someone is being taken advantage of or in a position to be victimized.

There are plenty of girls out there who have inadequate knowledge. That is a problem with society, government, education, and religion. But I don't see how it is relevant here. Would her whole personality change if another year passed and she turned 16? There are plenty of 18 year old girls who are easily manipulated too; every university student knows that the high school senior girls are easily manipulated. Perhaps we should raise the age of consent to 30?

Let's see... if she's 16 and deemed "adult enough" to drive a car then she's probably adult enough to have control over her own body and what she does with it... except we also say she can't get birth control or an abortion without parental involvement. Hmm.... yes, society is really mixed up about this, isn't it?

The problem is that we draw these lines based on chronological age rather than mental maturity. However, since we have no convenient marker for the latter we keep muddling along with the former.

I think the age spread is part of what is bothering me about this. If it was two 15 year olds, or 15 and 16, it wouldn't bother me quite so much but during the teens 4 years is significant. Granted, she would be almost 16 and he's just 19, making it more of a two year spread than 4, but we don't know from this article. She could just as easily be just 15 and him almost 20, which would be almost a 6 year spread. We just don't know based on the information we have.

[brianeyci]

As a point: I hope you are not a bitter AYVB member - or were in High School - but these ridiculous attempts to make an argument by name-calling and whining about being a "player" and the other idealistic shit is definitely making it sound that way.

What? You asked me whether or not I had sex in high school. I gave a reason why I did not. I did not come out and tell you not to have sex, or even that having sex in high school was a bad idea. If you have tons of sex all the more power to you.

I assume for starters you believe in some age restriction on sex, just not 20. You say there is no social benefit to 20 year old age restrictions on sex. I say there obviously is. Guys who drop out of school then get a job at Wal-Mart or Home Depot and come back when they're 19 or 20 and cruise around high school for a piece of 15 year old ass even though they have no business being around -- don't you think the law can step in? There are a lot of these guys -- if you don't want to call them players, call them whatever you want.

You say that the law can't stop liars in a relationship, and that's entirely true, but it sure can discourage liars. What would have happened if you couldn't have sex with that 16 year old? Absolutely fucking nothing -- plenty of women when you were 20, and for her plenty of men her age. You brought up biology, but you conveniently ignore the development of the brain which continues IIRC up to late teens. The plumbing is there but the mind is not, and you ignore that in favour of your crusade to annihilate religious promiscuity, even though more sex ed leads to delayed sex.

[Justforfun000]

Broomstick Wrote:

I bother with it because when I don't people tend to read things into my posts that aren't there. Sometimes, I over-clarify but I'd rather have too much background to avoid misunderstanding than too little.

Yes, but this thread is not a conversation solely between you and me, and thus when I respond I am assuming that others besides you will be reading it - another reason why I tend to "overexplain" myself. I don't assume everyone reading knows me, my posting history, or really anything outside of this thread.

TO Illuminatus Primus:

She's absolutely right IP. Her posts are far clearer then most people who end up having to answer back and forth for 5 more posts before getting to a new point in the discussion. I generally try to do the same thing myself. It's not a bad idea to generalize and cover rhetorical parts of the discussion just to clarify and narrow down your specific points so they are not misconstrued. I don't think it's fair to jump on her for that. You're reacting very hostile for no good reason. She never once insulted your position or put words in your mouth. Just relax a bit bud.

[brianeyci]

As I said, Brian is a romantic. The danger in that viewpoint, in believing women to be pure as a default, is that is a potential exploit for user women.

However, he is correct in that this girl needs some protecting until she is re-educated and a backbone is installed.

Maybe I am. Yes, I have to say I am. I assume it will be shattered eventually, but I haven't met many bitches yet. At least none that I can't forgive.

I have a huge... distaste for men who stick their dick into anything without regard for the consequences. "Slamming the book" when I said came more from the fact the guy was aware of the potential problem and chose to flaunt it, putting the girl in danger and embarassment too along with himself, rather than defense of the law. Because I don't particularly know or knew what the law was in that jurisdiction.

[Justforfun000]

Brianeyci Wrote

but I haven't met many bitches yet.

*Ahem*....is this also an intended pun on the OP?

[Illuminatus Primus]

I assume for starters you believe in some age restriction on sex, just not 20. You say there is no social benefit to 20 year old age restrictions on sex. I say there obviously is. Guys who drop out of school then get a job at Wal-Mart or Home Depot and come back when they're 19 or 20 and cruise around high school for a piece of 15 year old ass even though they have no business being around -- don't you think the law can step in? There are a lot of these guys -- if you don't want to call them players, call them whatever you want.

I'm saying that the current legal solutions are probably worse than useless and hardly ever work. You're not going to be able to legislate good sense into high school freshman and sophomore girls. And let's be serious: this is a poor, trailer trash thing. And there are entire families based around the idea that this kind of liason is acceptable in that community. You said throw the book at them. I say improve education, sexual and otherwise, and give these young men disincentive to pursue younger women while also providing them with the future opportunities so any guy who does not go to college after high school has nearly nothing to offer his female peers.

And besides, your definition of player is inconsistent with what we are talking about. Guys who are really good at getting laid are not going to be prowling high schools for fifteen year olds, because that's fucking pathetic and they wouldn't need to.

You say that the law can't stop liars in a relationship, and that's entirely true, but it sure can discourage liars. What would have happened if you couldn't have sex with that 16 year old? Absolutely fucking nothing -- plenty of women when you were 20, and for her plenty of men her age. You brought up biology, but you conveniently ignore the development of the brain which continues IIRC up to late teens. The plumbing is there but the mind is not, and you ignore that in favour of your crusade to annihilate religious promiscuity, even though more sex ed leads to delayed sex.

You must establish that the harm done is significant to the point where the proscriptive legal remedies you prefer would be optimal. Quite frankly, it matters a lot the circumstances. Those girls are still my friends and now go to college with me - they have their own significant others, they are pursuing future career paths, they are ostensibly healthy. However, I also went to a 97% white school in a very wealthy area with a continentally renown prep program; me and my peers do not represent the norm. Furthermore, its more of a symptom than the disease - harping on a girl as a victim and throwing the guy in prison is really inappropriate for dealing with the actual problem and its causes. Quite frankly, this Republitard moral-outrage/"tough on crime" type solution is worst suited for this kind of thing, where intelligent social services are required. Better education and psychological help is needed for the girls; 15-year-old girls who aren't making themselves available to 19-20 year olds mean fewer potential statutory rapes.

[ArmorPierce]

14, 15 - not a fuck of a lot of difference. Not a fuck of a lot of difference between last year of middle school and first year of high school. That slight bump in age in no way changes my stance.

Considering what we are discussing here is indeed the difference of a small handfull of years, 1 year does make a lot of a difference.

[Warsie]

I can't possibly be the only one who read this and thought of 4chan's /tg/.

More like 4chan's /b/ given some of the stories posted there.

Or 12chan...

[Warsie]

There are a metric fuckton of these 'otherkin' nutcases on the Internet, all with their own ludicrous invented cosmologies/mythologies centered around proving why they're special. Really on the delusion scale it's no different than a bog-standard monotheistic religion, though obviously rather more individualistic and usually narcissistic. I don't think the average 'otherkin' is any more likely to be a rapist than say the average Christian.

Please don't confuse otherkin and furries with Christian Fundamentalists. No, I'm NOT a furry but the fursecution thing seems to me to be some bullshit.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Please don't confuse otherkin and furries with Christian Fundamentalists. No, I'm NOT a furry but the fursecution thing seems to me to be some bullshit.

You realize that Starglider is a self-proclaimed furry himself?

Regardless, what's the difference? One has less influence than the other?

[Warsie]

You realize that Starglider is a self-proclaimed furry himself?

no

Regardless, what's the difference? One has less influence than the other?

Furries aren't biased unlike the Christian Fundamentalists and are content with 'live and let live'

Here's a poll explaining that. You really thing fundamentalists=furries? Yes its wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furry_fandom#Fandom_survey

[Ritterin Sophia]

no

[/quote]Furries aren't biased unlike the Christian Fundamentalists and are content with 'live and let live'[/quote] Oh do shut up, I'm not talking about furries, I'm talking about Otherkin, how the fuck are they different from any fundamentalists? They argue the same unprovable points and expect you to disprove them.

Oh and here's a tip, don't mix furries in with Otherkin, one's a fetish, the others a full blown delusion..

Here's a poll explaining that. You really thing fundamentalists=furries? Yes its wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furry_fandom#Fandom_survey

Of course I know what the fuck a furry is, I also happen to know Renamon is very popular with furries, I know about General Rain. I know about furries.

[Warsie]

Oh do shut up, I'm not talking about furries, I'm talking about Otherkin, how the fuck are they different from any fundamentalists? They argue the same unprovable points and expect you to disprove them.

Oh and here's a tip, don't mix furries in with Otherkin, one's a fetish, the others a full blown delusion..

I know the difference in extremity between furies and othekin, I Was expecting to have to pull that

And also, IIRC otherkin aren't pushy and aggressive and tend to stay to themselves-unless they're recruiting and/or at conventions

Of course I know what the fuck a furry is, I also happen to know Renamon is very popular with furries, I know about General Rain. I know about furries.

I was referring to the poll on their sexuality. Christian Fundamentalists are radically different in that regad and want forced heterosexuality in marriage. Hence my differences.

[ArmorPierce]

[Don't know for sure, Mike - teenagers can mature in fits and starts. One year can make a lot of difference during those years.

Don't know if I'm misinterpreting here but it seems like you seem to be contradicting yourself in the age issue and what difference one year makes.

14, 15 - not a fuck of a lot of difference. Not a fuck of a lot of difference between last year of middle school and first year of high school. That slight bump in age in no way changes my stance.

As I see it... the difference between a typical 16 year old guy and a typical 19 year old isn't that vast. The only difference is on average the 19 year old has slightly more experience speaking and picking up girls than the 16 year old. That is it. There is no newfound knowledge that just appears after high school that makes them incredibly conniving, deceptive, and irresistible to younger members of the opposite sex.

[Ritterin Sophia]

And also, IIRC otherkin aren't pushy and aggressive and tend to stay to themselves-unless they're recruiting and/or at conventions

Apparently you've never run into one of those cross fandom guys.

I was referring to the poll on their sexuality. Christian Fundamentalists are radically different in that regad and want forced heterosexuality in marriage. Hence my differences.

What does their sexual preference have to do with anything?

[Gullible Jones]

Just something I want people here to think about:

If the sexes of the people involved were reversed - the 19-year-old were female, and the 15-year-old were male - would you argue that 15-year-old boys are naturally naive enough to be fooled in the same way?

I see a few possible answers...

1) Yes. We don't remember being that naive because we were too dumb to notice at the time.

2) No, and neither is the average 15-year-old girl, but some cases stand out.

3) No, cultural factors result in the average 15-year-old boy being more worldly.

And finally, the one that Hollywood and the Catholic Church absolutely loves:

4) No. At 15, females are innately more naive than males for biological reasons, and less capable of making decisions for themselves.

This is basically what I got drilled into me in high school health classes - that girls of my age (at the time), and even adult women, think (or don't) as if they are continually dosed up on anticholinergics, and are highly suggestible.

Generally, I feel that such implications (4) are a load of exaggerated pop-psych bullshit. I sure as hell hope they are anyway, because biology has already fucked women over quite absurdly in a lot of ways.

[Metatwaddle]

Just something I want people here to think about:

If the sexes of the people involved were reversed - the 19-year-old were female, and the 15-year-old were male - would you argue that 15-year-old boys are naturally naive enough to be fooled in the same way?

I see a few possible answers...

1) Yes. We don't remember being that naive because we were too dumb to notice at the time.

2) No, and neither is the average 15-year-old girl, but some cases stand out.

3) No, cultural factors result in the average 15-year-old boy being more worldly.

And finally, the one that Hollywood and the Catholic Church absolutely loves:

4) No. At 15, females are innately more naive than males for biological reasons, and less capable of making decisions for themselves.

This is basically what I got drilled into me in high school health classes - that girls of my age (at the time), and even adult women, think (or don't) as if they are continually dosed up on anticholinergics, and are highly suggestible.

Generally, I feel that such implications (4) are a load of exaggerated pop-psych bullshit. I sure as hell hope they are anyway, because biology has already fucked women over quite absurdly in a lot of ways.

I think 3 and 4 are bullshit, too. Actually, what I've heard is that teenage girls are on average more mature and sophisticated than boys, though I don't know what factors, biological or cultural, contribute to that. But you just don't get a reversed situation often. It's not that we couldn't get 15-year-old males to fuck us, it's that we're not remotely interested. What could a teenage boy offer me that I couldn't get from an older man?

I think that if women turned their predatory attention to younger boys, they could be even more manipulative and persuasive than men are to young girls. I also think that fewer people would care, because with teenage girls, it's sometimes (usually?) assumed that there's no way a young girl would fuck an older guy unless he was messing with her head. With teenage boys, everyone pretty much expects that they want to get laid any way they can. I'd expect the reactions - if not here, then in the general public - to look as if they were based on the unspoken assumption that because teenage males are desperate to get laid, they can consent to sex - which may be a valid deduction, but you can't have it both ways. If horny teenage guys can consent to sex, then so can horny teenage girls.

[brianeyci]

I'm saying that the current legal solutions are probably worse than useless and hardly ever work.

Obviously you can't legislate good sense. But there has to be a cut-off. You know why? You don't want thirty year old guy coming onto a 15 year old girl, and the police not having the tools to prevent a manipulation.

This is the point where you say, the law can be manipulated. Maybe a 16 year old girl really can mean something to a thirty year old man. Maybe a fourteen year old girl can mean something to a twenty year old. This is why you give discretion to the law, and to judges. I argue that if it reaches the point that the police are fishing for excuses to arrest men and women for having sex, there's far greater problems than just the legislation. At that point, fixing the legislation does nothing. Police officers come out and say, we are not after the 16 year old guy who has sex with the 15 year old, or the eighteen year old who has sex with the seventeen year old, even though we have the law to do it. If they don't in your jurisdiction, then the officers and culture is shit.

Throwing the book was only a phrase, made against a guy who lied about being a vampire werewolf. Throwing the book and education don't need to be mutually exclusive. Do you think I would've said throw the book if the guy wasn't telling a cocked up story about being a vampire? I wouldn't have said shit, at least not in those terms.

However, I also went to a 97% white school in a very wealthy area with a continentally renown prep program; me and my peers do not represent the norm.

If you and your people do not represent the norm, then maybe you shouldn't have mentioned having sex with a sixteen year old when you were twenty as if that was okay. Why did you even mention your personal experience if you know it to be not the norm?

Frankly you need carrot and stick. You seem to not want the stick at all. Well all I have to say is, the concept of jailbait to manipulators is straightforward and easy to understand. It is a strong deterrent to all except the most pathetic, like you said. This girl yes, that girl no. And if you have to pick a cut off, there is no better cut off than to pick when a woman's brain is fully developed along with her plumbing. At least that has a completely biological basis. Then, police officers need to use their discretion whether to charge a guy if they're only a year or two apart.

Education is all fine and good until you realize most people can't get things even with education. Most people will not get Calculus, most people will not get logic, and most people won't ever be able to understand anything except in the simplest of terms. Your trailer trash, it's entirely possible that many will never be able to understand anything but yes or no, allowed to fuck or not allowed to fuck.

As for you saying I have to prove some kind of harm, you've got it backwards. You want to change the current situation, you show how the future situation is more acceptable. Yes, conservatives are pretty retarded in most things. But I am not a fan of social engineering. The test subjects would be children, and the results only known years later. I'm not a fan of new age teaching methods, and I sure as hell am not a fan of twenty year olds having sex with fourteen year olds in general. Conservatism is actually logical -- given a completely unknown future and a known present, it's better to stay in the present.

[brianeyci]

I think 3 and 4 are bullshit, too. Actually, what I've heard is that teenage girls are on average more mature and sophisticated than boys, though I don't know what factors, biological or cultural, contribute to that. But you just don't get a reversed situation often. It's not that we couldn't get 15-year-old males to fuck us, it's that we're not remotely interested. What could a teenage boy offer me that I couldn't get from an older man?

This is actually one factor I haven't considered. Women do develop mentally and physically faster than men, and it might lead to a distasteful (at least for me) conclusion that fourteen year old women hooking up with twenty year old men is a mental and physical match. I will have to think about this further.

I think that if women turned their predatory attention to younger boys, they could be even more manipulative and persuasive than men are to young girls. I also think that fewer people would care, because with teenage girls, it's sometimes (usually?) assumed that there's no way a young girl would fuck an older guy unless he was messing with her head. With teenage boys, everyone pretty much expects that they want to get laid any way they can. I'd expect the reactions - if not here, then in the general public - to look as if they were based on the unspoken assumption that because teenage males are desperate to get laid, they can consent to sex - which may be a valid deduction, but you can't have it both ways. If horny teenage guys can consent to sex, then so can horny teenage girls.

That's true, but I don't think that it's entirely wrong to say that it's more likely the man is manipulative. Sure girls are horny, but do they think of sex x times every minute? Are the majority of rapes done by men, or women? This is another reason for automatic assumption that the man is being manipulative. I'm not entirely sure it's a very good reason though, and I have to think more about the fourteen year old woman having the mind of a twenty year old man more, even if it leads to the... disgusting conclusion that this might be acceptable (disgusting for me.)

If someone can post a study about the development of male psychology and emotions compared to female psychology and emotions, and it turns out fourteen year old women are a match for twenty year old men, I'll concede that this is acceptable. Even though I find it personally distasteful and would never do it myself (which is fine, I find many things such as prostitution or abortion or even hardcore porno personally distasteful but I defend the right for people to do it.)

[Justforfun000]

Brianeyci Wrote:

That's true, but I don't think that it's entirely wrong to say that it's more likely the man is manipulative. Sure girls are horny, but do they think of sex x times every minute?

I have to interject a point here....This begs the question that guys DO think of sex x times every minute. That's a false generalization. I personally rarely thought of sex in high school. My physical drive was, and is, quite low compared to many women I know and there is nothing 'wrong' with me physically. I just don't have a hyper sex drive and I know other guys that are the same.

Are the majority of rapes done by men, or women? This is another reason for automatic assumption that the man is being manipulative.

However, THAT is a very good point. At least in a sense. I don't know if I'd necessarily say your conclusion is valid, but the factor that involves imposition of any kind leading up to the worst scenario of rape could probably be argued as to motive....there is no question that forced sexual assault is largely done by men.

Still, emotional manipulation that ends up with consensual sex is still vastly different from rape, so you'd have to be very careful how you parallel things here...

If someone can post a study about the development of male psychology and emotions compared to female psychology and emotions, and it turns out fourteen year old women are a match for twenty year old men, I'll concede that this is acceptable. Even though I find it personally distasteful and would never do it myself (which is fine, I find many things such as prostitution or abortion or even hardcore porno personally distasteful but I defend the right for people to do it.)

I admit I don't particularly like the mental image myself, but I guess objective analysis of physical and emotional maturity is the only important deciding factors to go by.

[Durandal]

Ghetto-edit:

Although that has to be the lamest fucking pick-up line ever.

"I'm a vampire-werewolf hybrid. Wanna come see my lair?"

Seriously. Why didn't he just go the whole 9 yards and tell her how much XP he had?

[Darth Wong]

I have to interject a point here....This begs the question that guys DO think of sex x times every minute. That's a false generalization. I personally rarely thought of sex in high school. My physical drive was, and is, quite low compared to many women I know and there is nothing 'wrong' with me physically. I just don't have a hyper sex drive and I know other guys that are the same.

There are exceptions to any rule about peoples' behaviour; they don't disprove the rule. It's a well-known medical fact that testosterone increases sex drive, even when it is administered to females. It is therefore quite reasonable to state as a generalization that males (who have naturally elevated testosterone levels) are hornier.

In any case, speaking for myself, I find that the generalization holds quite true for me. I think of sex constantly. I sometimes call Rebecca from work just to tell her how much I want to bang her when I get home. When I'm driving in the car, I like to visualize her in bed. Thoughts of sex float through my head all the time. Of course, it's possible that I'm at the high end of the scale, but it's pretty much undeniable that the scale for men is higher in general than the scale for women.