Posted on 09/22/2017 11:24:12 AM PDT by fwdude
It seems as if quite a few people aren’t interested in a relationship with an equal.
Kinsey made his “research” up.
Boy, I need to print this, and reread it with a highlighter. “Discursive consciousness”? He’s obviously very intelligent. Tried to look up Bruce Rind, but all I found is he doesn’t believe minor sex is abuse. Nobody said he was homosexual, which is what I expect to be true. But he certainly believes the current society is headed to uncriminalize minor sex. OY!
Two things are true of children:
They are sexual beings. They are of two sexes, not multiple, indeterminate genders: If not excessively and deliberately perverted by depraved totalitarians, boys will indeed be boys, and girls will indeed be girls - both positively and negatively.
They are sexually immature persons, and absolutely must be protected from such depraved totalitarians, as well as from their own misguided and ephemeral notions.
The idea that a child can competently choose to be in an erotic relationship with an adult is a lie, and is the very reason for statutory rape laws.
No harm is really done?
As a former youth minister who witnessed such ostensibly harmless sexual behavior, I know that to be a fatuous lie. PERIOD!
Let’s see the possibilities: Unwanted pregnancy. Sexually-transmitted disease. Public embarrassment (or humiliation, depending upon the sub-culture). Destruction of parent-child trust. Erosion of self control and self esteem. Gateway to other moral/ethical corruption.
Yeah, tell those jurors it’s all a-okay, and this is the modern day, and parental authority is so 20th Century. Mustn’t discourage horny lads from exploiting naive and vulnerable female legal minors!
One may - may! - argue that the degree of harm is lessened, but it is manifestly there.
We do not have an agrarian society, where 16-year-olds can legitimately marry and set up a household together on a farm and be independent and productive and treated as adults by their fellows.
Federal control of education makes high school attendance -and hence functional adolescence - artificially extended to age 18, the age of legal majority, regardless of biological urges.
Yes, it is somewhat arbitrary, but it reflects that the 17-year-old (usually the female) is still wholly dependent upon the parents who are legally responsible, and must therefore also have their authority protected by law; the 19-year-old (usually the male) is almost never either able or willing to be wholly responsible for the female he is using for his transitory pleasure.
Trivializing this scenario via the 17 & 19 situation plays into the slippery slope that the communists want society to slide down.
The legislature of the State of Maryland does not. Do you want juries "convicting" people of "crimes" that they have just invented, because they think the relevant legislative body got it wrong?
Sick...very very sick!!!
To the best of my memory he theory was articulated in an article in Esquire or Playboy around 1953-56.
30-35 was to “educate 18-20 for 15 years and then switch partners for 15 or so years. 35s to “educate’ the younger. When one reached 50s they were to m’Marry another 50. (my thought here would be”Why”.)
It was such a weird conjecture that I remember it still today!
Ultimately, there is no endgame for the left, they are only going to get more lawless and crazy with time, as if it couldn’t be any worse already.
What’s messed up is that some people celebrate their own divorce in a divorce divorce party nowadays.
Thanks for posting that. I have seen some of his work before. John Money is another of the same ilk. That sexual deviant disguised his obsession as “research” and ruined the lives of many children including the Canadian Reimer twins.
Any adult who gets aroused by a pre pubescent child is a pervert and if that adult acts on that arousal they become a predator. There are no exceptions.
Once puberty takes over, it becomes a moral issue. The child can most definitely still be harmed and should be left alone until they reach a level of maturity that allows them to make informed decisions. For many, I’d say that is into their 20’s, but it wasn’t that many decades ago that girls regularly married and had children while still in their teens, so I see both sides of that argument.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.