should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?

[joebbowers]

Let's just put it this way. I won't be calling you or your whore to babysit anytime soon, you sick, disgusting fuck.

When logic and reason fail, resort to name calling. Internet 101.

Your profile pic makes this comment all the more ironic. You are obviously the moral authority here.

[lotanddaughters]

Your profile pic makes this comment all the more ironic. You are obviously the moral authority here.

My profile pic is to enlighten parents that maybe the Bible is not so good to teach children. If I was forced to leave an eleven-year-old girl in your care, I would have nightmares all night visualizing you staring at her the way you stare at me in your profile pic.

[joebbowers]

Are you through with your tantrum now? I'll ask you again. You are implying that couples in a more open sexual relationship do not make good parents. Care you back that up with research results or other evidence?

And now you've called my wife a whore. Your opinion of women is so low that when they choose to explore their sexuality you look down on them with scorn and derision and label them with hateful terms.

So when you're tossing out terms like "sick, disgusting fuck" you might want to tidy up your own backyard first.

[Gnu Ordure]

Kimberly, how can you determine when someone is mentally and emotionally ready for sex? You're sexually active right? How do you know when a potential partner is ready?

Do you have some sort of test or measurement that you perform?

Excuse me for jumping in, Kimberly.

People judge readiness by talking, and establishing recognition of potential consequences and risks. And establishing informed consent.

Most 18-year-olds can do this. 17-year-olds slightly less so, 16-year-olds slightly less so, and so on.

But since there is no objective measure of this ability, societies simpy draw a line at a certain age, so everyone knows where they stand and there are no legal grey areas. It's artificial and arbitrary, but there's no workable alternative.

Or do you abdicate your moral authority and simply believe that, ready or not, once they reach the legal age of consent you no longer have any responsibility to ensure readiness?

The moral responsibility to establish readiness is still there.

[joebbowers]

People judge readiness by talking, and establishing recognition of potential consequences and risks. And establishing informed consent.

Most 18-year-olds can do this. 17-year-olds slightly less so, 16-year-olds slightly less so, and so on.

But since there is no objective measure of this ability, societies simpy draw a line at a certain age, so everyone knows where they stand and there are no legal grey areas. It's artificial and arbitrary, but there's no workable alternative.

That sounds damn similar to what I said 10 pages ago. Kimberly even quoted it on page 20 so I'm sure she read it.

...the problem is determining her mental fitness. Is an 11 year old capable of that kind of understanding? Perhaps some are, but certainly most aren't. How could you determine which ones are? I don't know. Some specially designed psychological tests, I would imagine. Of course, that's awkward foreplay and it's not reasonable to set age of consent laws on a case-by-case basis.

But that answer was apparently not acceptable. So, I'm curious how she establishes consent.

[Seppuku]

I should hope if Joe is having threesomes it's behind closed doors and not in a situation where the kid can accidentally stumble upon them doing the sex. Heck, kids probably do walk in when their parents are trying to have sex. Not because they're doing anything 'wrong' in the bedroom, it's just not great for the kid to walk in and see people having it off. If they've got an open relationship, that's up to them, just so long as they're not harming the child. I think a parent can be whatever they want to be so long as they raise their kid well, have them growing up in a positive environment and out of harm's way.


It's interesting that Joe gets his ability as a parent questioned a lot here, yet we don't know what he is like as a parent. We know his views on sexuality, what he's naturally sexually attracted to (and how he restricts himself) and also we have some idea of his sex life too. All I know about his parenting is that: he took in kids who needed parents, he cares for kids and enjoys being around them for pretty much the same reasons any father would.

Maybe I've been missing something here?

[Kimberly]

Kimberly, how can you determine when someone is mentally and emotionally ready for sex? You're sexually active right? How do you know when a potential partner is ready?

Do you have some sort of test or measurement that you perform?

Excuse me for jumping in, Kimberly.

By all means go ahead. I some how missed this post but I refuse to answer any of Joe's questions until he stops dodging mine.

[lotanddaughters]

Maybe I've been missing something here?

Nope. Not a thing. Go ahead and send the kids over.

[Gnu Ordure]

But that answer was apparently not acceptable. So, I'm curious how she establishes consent.

It's not acceptable because society has decided that 11-year-olds aren't capable of understanding an issue of this complexity, so they can't give informed consent.

Whereas you think that the age of consent should be drastically reduced:

I agree, there should be a line, but I think the age of consent should be lowered to the same age that a juvenile could be tried as an adult.

Which in the US is between 6 and 12 (here).

And that's why we're having this whole argument.

PS:

my girlfriend is a little bi-curious as I think many girls are...

I'm curious as to who Joe means by his 'girlfriend'. What husband refers to his wife as his girlfriend? None that I know of. Maybe he means his mistress. That's possible. Care to share, Joe?

?

[Quesi]

It's interesting that Joe gets his ability as a parent questioned a lot here, yet we don't know what he is like as a parent.

We don't know a thing about Joe's parenting skills or his role as a parent because (and I could be wrong here) I'm pretty sure that today was the first day that he wrote anything on this forum about his kids.  Other than requesting money for his daughter's operation a little while back.

Now a lot of forum members come here to talk about atheism and critical thinking and whatnot, and don't really engage in much personal disclosure.  That is fine.  Others come here and talk about how questions of ethics and the predominant religious practices impact on our families and communities and workplaces.  That is ok too.  Sexual attitudes in the face of "religious moral standards" is certainly fair game as well.  I know who the well-informed scientists are, and look to them with awe. 

I write about my daughter a lot on this forum because she is the center of my universe.  I also write a lot about issues relating to social and economic justice because those issues are a driving force in my life.  Those are the issues that are most important to me in my life, and the issues that intersect with the forum's themes.

I know quite a bit about Joe's friend who got arrested for possession of child porn because Joe has written about him a lot.  I know a lot about his travels and his photography work because he writes about those things a lot.  I know more about his sexual interests and practices that I care to know.  But honestly, he doesn't write about his kids or his role as a parent or his attitude towards social issues that impact on his kids enough for me to even be able to imagine him as a parent. 

 

[lotanddaughters]

Are you through with your tantrum now?

I think so.

I'll ask you again. You are implying that couples in a more open sexual relationship do not make good parents?

I might have been implying that, but I had no good reason to. I will concede that point. "The sexual relationship of parents does not necessarily dictate the quality of parenthood."

Care to back that up with research results or other evidence?

I can't. I will agree with you until someone proves to us otherwise.
 

And now you've called my wife a whore. Your opinion of women is so low that when they choose to explore their sexuality you look down on them with scorn and derision and label them with hateful terms.

I know you probably understand that when someone calls your wife, mother, or whoever a name, they are really directing it at you. Nevertheless, it was uncalled for and I'm sorry. "I'm sorry" really isn't accurate, though. It's more like I really wasn't angry at you or your wife, I just got the urge to call somebody a whore. I hope you understand.

So when you're tossing out terms like "sick, disgusting fuck" you might want to tidy up your own backyard first.

Point taken.

[joebbowers]

Now that's impressive. When my one hour time limit has expired from smiting your last comment I'm going to upvote this one.

[jaimehlers]

Let's just put it this way. I won't be calling you or your whore to babysit anytime soon, you sick, disgusting fuck.

I was just about to issue a proper reaming for this comment, and then you had to go and calm down so I didn't feel justified in doing so.

The only thing I'm going to suggest is that if you find yourself getting upset at something, take a break from posting till you calm down.  Then you don't have to worry about how other people will react.

[joebbowers]

But that answer was apparently not acceptable. So, I'm curious how she establishes consent.

It's not acceptable because society has decided that 11-year-olds aren't capable of understanding an issue of this complexity, so they can't give informed consent.

How is my answer any different from your answer?

Yours: "People judge readiness by talking, and establishing recognition of potential consequences and risks. And establishing informed consent.
Most 18-year-olds can do this. 17-year-olds slightly less so, 16-year-olds slightly less so, and so on. But since there is no objective measure of this ability, societies simpy draw a line at a certain age, so everyone knows where they stand and there are no legal grey areas. It's artificial and arbitrary, but there's no workable alternative."

In other words, it's highly unlikely that any 11 year old could consent to sex, and even if some could, it may be impossible to determine. It's not reasonable to set age of consent for each individual so we have one standard for everyone. Is that an accurate summary?

Mine: "...the problem is determining her mental fitness. Is an 11 year old capable of that kind of understanding? Perhaps some are, but certainly most aren't. How could you determine which ones are? I don't know. Some specially designed psychological tests, I would imagine. Of course, that's awkward foreplay and it's not reasonable to set age of consent laws on a case-by-case basis."

In other words, it's highly unlikely that any 11 year old could consent to sex, and even if some could, it may be impossible to determine. It's not reasonable to set age of consent for each individual so we have one standard for everyone.

Why is your answer acceptable but mine isn't?

Whereas you think that the age of consent should be drastically reduced:

I agree, there should be a line, but I think the age of consent should be lowered to the same age that a juvenile could be tried as an adult.

Which in the US is between 6 and 12 (here).

6 to 12 was your number, not mine. My point was that it's hypocritical to say that an 8 year old who commits murder is a rational adult, but a teenager who has sex is an innocent child.

I think 14 is a reasonable age to be considered an adult, and I think that should apply to both sexual consent and accountability for one's actions. That is not a drastic reduction from the current age of 16 in most states in the US, and at least one state is already at 14. Internationally many countries have an age of consent of 14.

I'm curious as to who Joe means by his 'girlfriend'. What husband refers to his wife as his girlfriend? None that I know of. Maybe he means his mistress. That's possible. Care to share, Joe?

I use the terms wife and girlfriend interchageably. This is a habit I've picked up from the Chinese.

[lotanddaughters]

Now that's impressive. When my one hour time limit has expired from smiting your last comment I'm going to upvote this one.

To be honest, I've stuck up for you alot in the recent past. I wanted to stir up some shit because when I came across this,

so we occasionally like to find another girl to bring home to play with us.

I just couldn't resist. You thumbed me down and replied. I replied back, and so it went. It was fun, but you cornered me with a couple gotcha questions. Good posts, Joe.

Watch out, though. I shall return.

[lotanddaughters]

I was just about to issue a proper reaming for this comment

I love confrontational comments like this. I'm serious. There is a good one going on over there with pianodwarf and Frank.

In all honesty, like Joe pointed out, whether we agree or disagree or sit on the fence, Joe has provided around 3 epic, interesting threads that the users of WWGHA just can't seem to get enough of.

[joebbowers]

That's what I'm here for, to make you think.

[jaimehlers]

I think 14 is a reasonable age to be considered an adult, and I think that should apply to both sexual consent and accountability for one's actions. That is not a drastic reduction from the current age of 16 in most states in the US, and at least one state is already at 14. Internationally many countries have an age of consent of 14.

I don't agree with this.  Leaving aside questions about sex and accountability, a 14-year old is very seldom going to be ready or able to take on an adult's responsibilities.  I know I wasn't, at 14.  I wasn't really even ready at 18, 20, or even 22.  It took me till my mid-twenties to really get my act together so that I could actually be a productive and responsible adult rather than an adolescent who was legally considered an adult.  Certainly, some 14-year olds are, but they're the exception rather than the rule.  Certainly, it was possible for people even younger than that to become adults in tribal societies, and it certainly would be possible for 14-year olds to enter the workforce even in a modern day industrialized society.  But I don't really think it would be a good idea under almost any circumstances.

I would be okay with adult responsibilities being available at 16.  I think a 16-year old is physically and mentally mature enough to be able to function as an adult, even though they wouldn't be all that good at it for the most part.  But earlier than that?  No, not really.

[lotanddaughters]

In other words, it's highly unlikely that any 11 year old could consent to sex, and even if some could, it may be impossible to determine. It's not reasonable to set age of consent for each individual so we have one standard for everyone.

Joe, maybe you've addressed this already in a different post, but I have to ask. Is it the youth of the body on that mature 11 year old, or the youthful mind, or what that you seem to favor? Or don't you favor? If your wife(not a whore) has given birth already, she must be a bit past 11 years old. If this is too personal questioning, I understand.

[joebbowers]

It's not the youth that I'm attracted to. I'm attracted to what appears to be a sexually developed woman, despite her youth. An 11 year old who looks 18 is attractive because she looks like a woman. This is completely normal, healthy sexual attraction that modern society makes men feel guilty for feeling. On the other hand I would not find an 18 year old who looked 11 attractive because I don't find little kids attractive.

[lotanddaughters]

I would be okay with adult responsibilities being available at 16.  I think a 16-year old is physically and mentally mature enough to be able to function as an adult, even though they wouldn't be all that good at it for the most part.  But earlier than that?  No, not really.

I think the age, whether 18, 16, or whatever, is determined in a society by the tug-of-war between the rights of parents that are humans who need to be satisfied and the child who deserves the right to live. If you are the father of a girl, you know that 18 might be better than 14 when it comes to decision making, but 30 is even better. If you are the girl and you have to wait until you're 30, you are missing out on life, especially if you die at age 19 or 23. Many societies settle on 16, 17, or 18 probably because of this. Or maybe not. I don't really know.

[lotanddaughters]

It's not the youth that I'm attracted to. I'm attracted to what appears to be a sexually developed woman, despite her youth. An 11 year old who looks 18 is attractive because she looks like a woman. This is completely normal, healthy sexual attraction that modern society makes men feel guilty for feeling. On the other hand I would not find an 18 year old who looked 11 attractive because I don't find little kids attractive.

Let me get this straight. As long as she is developed and attractive, you are there. She could be 11 or 40. The reason you went down to 11 was just to test the waters as to how low the men you are asking will go, maybe to see how "normal" or close to average you are. Am I close, or still a little off?

[joebbowers]

I would be okay with adult responsibilities being available at 16.  I think a 16-year old is physically and mentally mature enough to be able to function as an adult, even though they wouldn't be all that good at it for the most part.  But earlier than that?  No, not really.

We need to remember that the goal is protecting children from abuse, not simply forcing our morality on everyone else. I think when you consider that what we're talking about here is throwing people in prison, taking away their rights and destroying their lives, we should draw our lines in the sand as conservatively as we can. I think 14 is a more practical limit, but I would agree with a slap on the wrist type of punishment between 14 and 16.

Regarding accountability for one's actions, would you also say that nobody under 16 should be tried as an adult?

[joebbowers]

Let me get this straight. As long as she is developed and attractive, you are there. She could be 11 or 40.

Define "there". If you simply mean attracted, then sure. You could make me a android wife with a sexy body and I'd find her hot right off the assembly line. Or some 400 year old elf goddess that still has silky smooth skin and perky breasts. It's purely physical. Age is irrelevant to attraction.

The reason you went down to 11 was just to test the waters as to how low the men you are asking will go, maybe to see how "normal" or close to average you are. Am I close, or still a little off?

I posted a photo of an abnormally mature looking 11 year old to demonstrate that normal men are attracted to sexually developed females regardless of their age. Normal men do not act on that attraction when it would be inappropriate or harmful, but it's sad that they feel guilty for the attraction itself. There's nothing to be ashamed of in finding what appears to be, for all intents and purposes, a woman, attractive.

I'm frankly amazed that so many of you continue to villify me when you admitted to sharing the same attraction. But of course you rationalized your own attraction by reminding yourself that she was especially developed, and that the source of your attraction was not the fact that she was 11, but an extension of your normal healthy heterosexual attraction to women. You dismissed your feelings as normal and yet when I expressed the same attraction, for the same reasons, somehow I'm the bad guy.

[lotanddaughters]

Define "there". If you simply mean attracted, then sure. You could make me a android wife with a sexy body and I'd find her hot right off the assembly line. Or some 400 year old elf goddess that still has silky smooth skin and perky breasts. It's purely physical. Age is irrelevant to attraction.

By "there" I meant "attracted to", so your answer satisfied my question. Thank you. 

I posted a photo of an abnormally mature looking 11 year old to demonstrate that normal men are attracted to sexually developed females regardless of their age. Normal men do not act on that attraction when it would be inappropriate or harmful, but it's sad that they feel guilty for the attraction itself. There's nothing to be ashamed of in finding what appears to be, for all intents and purposes, a woman, attractive.

Good stuff. I agree.

I'm frankly amazed that so many of you continue to villify me when you admitted to sharing the same attraction. But of course you rationalized your own attraction by reminding yourself that she was especially developed, and that the source of your attraction was not the fact that she was 11, but an extension of your normal healthy heterosexual attraction to women.

Amazingly true, Joe. There might be a psychological truth underlying all this in the difference of looking at you and looking within themselves.



And also, here,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_birth_mothers

you have a lengthy list of girls who had the ability to bear children at an abnormally young age, and for every single one of these, there was some dude with a hard cock waiting to go. I'm sure there were many more girls like this who ended up safe from these predators,[1] but Goddamn.

You dismissed your feelings as normal and yet when I expressed the same attraction, for the same reasons, somehow I'm the bad guy.

It does seem like you're often the "go to bad guy". You say you like vanilla ice cream, they scream for your head on a waffle cone. Someone else says they like vanilla cream that is iced, everything is okay. Some of these people might even hold grudges from previous threads.

1.

You can probably exclude some of the young fathers and/or husbands from the "predator" category. Or maybe not, depending on the age of the girl and the average age of both "men" and "women" at marriage within their particular society. And in their particular society, I might use the terms "men" and "women" extremely loosely.

[lotanddaughters]

my girlfriend is a little bi-curious as I think many girls are...

I'm curious as to who Joe means by his 'girlfriend'.

What husband refers to his wife as his girlfriend? None that I know of.

Maybe he means his mistress. That's possible.

Care to share, Joe?

You know what, Joe? Usually, people who talk about their wife and themselves before they were married clarify in ways like "my girlfriend(now my wife)". You have already sensed that you give some of these people "a bad taste in their mouth" before you even type a single character. As far as we know, it wouldn't be a stretch to wonder if the girlfriend in this case was an extramarital female.

Whether some forum members' preconceived notions about you are accurate or not, this just adds to the shadiness of your perceived character, I think.

The more shadiness you add, the less likely you will be allowed to adopt.[1]

1.	I don't think you are trying to adopt any children, but hypothetically.

[jaimehlers]

We need to remember that the goal is protecting children from abuse, not simply forcing our morality on everyone else. I think when you consider that what we're talking about here is throwing people in prison, taking away their rights and destroying their lives, we should draw our lines in the sand as conservatively as we can. I think 14 is a more practical limit, but I would agree with a slap on the wrist type of punishment between 14 and 16.

Regarding accountability for one's actions, would you also say that nobody under 16 should be tried as an adult?

I certainly do not agree with your idea that fourteen is a "practical" limit.

Let me put it this way.  I don't consider a fourteen-year old to be a child by any reasonable standard.  But I also don't consider a fourteen-year old to be capable of performing an adult's responsibilities, or to be the equal of an adult.  So, you shouldn't necessarily throw the book at them, but a twenty-something undoubtedly has the ability to take advantage of a fourteen-year old for sexual purposes, simply because fourteen-year olds don't have the maturity needed to recognize and deal with such predators.  That's why we have laws, to protect people from that sort of thing, especially people who may not be able to recognize the scale of the danger they face.

As to your question, the fact that there are some youths under legal majority who are tried as adults doesn't mean anything.  Most youths under eighteen who are tried as adults have other factors which weigh in besides their age, such as the severity of the crime and their past criminal record.  So if the age of majority were moved downwards to sixteen, there would undoubtedly be some fourteen-year olds who would be tried as adults, because of those other factors.

[joebbowers]

The more shadiness you add, the less likely you will be allowed to adopt.

Bwahahaha!

[joebbowers]

So if the age of majority were moved downwards to sixteen, there would undoubtedly be some fourteen-year olds who would be tried as adults, because of those other factors.

So you don't think it's hypocritical to say that a 14 year old is not capable of making decisions like an adult and should be protected but a 14 year old is capable of making decisions like an adult and should be punished?