which sexual acts do you consider to be immoral?

[FallingPianos]

This statement is erroneous.
It is considered medically "normal" for girls to experience menarche at some point between the ages of nine and sixteen years of age.
Nine (like sixteen) is the extreme outer perimeter of what is considered medically normal, with the median age of menarche being, of course, about twelve and a half.
A girl who enters puberty earlier than nine (or later than sixteen, for that matter) is not considered medically normal, is considered to have a pathology, and is treated medically.

A menstruating six-year-old (or two-year-old, or eight-year-old, for that matter) whose parents did not obtain medical intervention and treatment for her would be considered by most states to be guilty of criminal negligence, and would risk losing custody of their child.

do you have any sources on that?

but for now, for the sake of argument, do you think a 9 year old girl who has entered puberty is capable of giving consent to sex?

 

[FallingPianos]

So even if the have NOT reached puberty it is OK to have sex with them if they have the capacity to make informed sexual decisions.That could be 10 years old. How do you define "having the capacity to make informed sexual decisions'?

I have met some extremely mature 12 year olds who I would have considered capable of making such decisions, but never a 10 year old. but, hypothetically if a 10 year old was mature enough to make decisions about sex, I wouldn't consider it immoral to have sex with them, even if they haven't entered puberty.

I will admit that its not easy to define. characteristics would include abstract thought, responsibility, and strong sense of identity that is separate from parents. but then again, not all adults have all of these.

 

[Billo_Really]

The act of saying "no" when I demand sex!

 

[1069]

but for now, for the sake of argument, do you think a 9 year old girl who has entered puberty is capable of giving consent to sex?

I think this girl's body has already "consented" to sex, and to childbearing.
I think it is safe to assume that if she is occupying a sexually mature body, she will be propositioned for sex, because it is not safe to assume otherwise.

And yes. I do think that a pubertal nine-year-old's mental processes are such that she is capable of understanding- in a general sense- the mechanics and consequences of sex, and understanding that her body is physiologically ready for sex and that's what puberty is about, and understanding that regardless of that, her brain is in charge, and unlike her body, can weigh consequences and make advantageous decisions.

do you have any sources on that?

Precocious puberty

Clinical significance:
[Precocious puberty can...]
1. induce early bone maturation and reduce eventual adult height,
2. cause significant social problems, or
3. indicate the presence of a tumor or other serious problem.

... Bones can be considered older in individuals with early puberty beyond actual age of individual. Early puberty is marked by growth hormone problems resulting from various brain disorders.

Central precocious puberty can be caused by intracranial neoplasm, infection, trauma, hydrocephalus, and Angelman syndrome.

Measures:

* Pubic hair or genital enlargement in boys with onset before 9 years.
* Breast development in boys before appearance of pubic hair and testicular enlargement.
* Pubic hair before 8 or breast development in girls with onset before 7 years.
* Vaginal bleeding in girls before 10 years.


That said, I'm sure we can both concede that "Wikipedia" is not a reliable nor a credible source for medical information, and that, unfortunately, many of the sources containing studies that could be considered credible either cost money or require membership to access.

I personally believe there is both a racist and a classist element to some of these studies; I will decline to expand on that idea, at the risk of inadvertently saying something that might offend.
Suffice it to say that, yes, I believe that in cultures where early onset of menarche is the norm, girls are ready at puberty to make conscious and informed decisions about whether or not they want to have sex.

In cultures where later onset of menarche is the norm, it's possible that sometimes girls who enter puberty earlier than their peers are... socially disadvantaged, by that fact.
That is where adult guidance- not denial- becomes crucial.
And that, unfortunately, is where denial is most often the order of the day.

 

[FallingPianos]

And yes. I do think that a pubertal nine-year-old's mental processes are such that she is capable of understanding- in a general sense- the mechanics and consequences of sex, and understanding that her body is physiologically ready for sex and that's what puberty is about, and understanding that regardless of that, her brain is in charge, and unlike her body, can weigh consequences and make advantageous decisions.

I understood the mechanics of sex, pregnancy, and childbirth when I was 5 or 6 years old. I started becoming interested in sex when I was 9, saw physical signs of puberty when I was 10, and got my first period when I was 13. despite this, I don't think I would have been mature enough to handle any sort of sexual relationship with someone more than 3 or 4 years older than me until I was around 20. I'm 21 now.

I'm fortunate enough to have always had good common sense, and a good sense of intuition. I was never vulnerable to the peer pressure that my friends submitted to. I am not someone who would have been very susceptible to manipulation had someone much older than me tried to pursue me.

but I was the exception, not the rule.

(as a side note, my focus has been on girls because they enter puberty earlier and make better examples, and also because what i've seen happen has always happened to girls. this should not be taken to mean that I find it any more acceptable for boys)

 

[Doremus Jessup]

Everything except missionary.

 

[1069]

I understood the mechanics of sex, pregnancy, and childbirth when I was 5 or 6 years old. I started becoming interested in sex when I was 9, saw physical signs of puberty when I was 10, and got my first period when I was 13. despite this, I don't think I would have been mature enough to handle any sort of sexual relationship with someone more than 3 or 4 years older than me until I was around 20. I'm 21 now.

I'm fortunate enough to have always had good common sense, and a good sense of intuition. I was never vulnerable to the peer pressure that my friends submitted to. I am not someone who would have been very susceptible to manipulation had someone much older than me tried to pursue me.

but I was the exception, not the rule.

What makes you think so?
What is "the rule"?

I was definitely the "exception to the rule", I've no doubt; I didn't start my period until I was fourteen years old, and I got pregnant after I'd only had a couple of them.

But, you know... everybody's got a story.

I think it's a mistake to assume that because some people might not have the same intellect as you (or me, or whoever. "You", in the general sense), or might not have had the same educational opportunities and social advantages, that they are not as savvy, independent, street-smart, etc.
That their instincts about people and about life are not as reliable or trustworthy. That their cognitive skills are not as good.
In my experience, this is not the case.
Some people just communicate better than others, that's all.
That does not necessarily mean that they think better.

(as a side note, my focus has been on girls because they enter puberty earlier and make better examples, and also because what i've seen happen has always happened to girls. this should not be taken to mean that I find it any more acceptable for boys)

Boy puberty is just heartbreaking.
I cannot say more, without betraying the privacy of my children, but I will say that boys seem far more bewildered, clueless, victimized, and just basically caught off guard by the whole thing than I ever recall feeling.

 

[buttonpsi]

No one should have sex with animals, or children, or food....yes food.

I forgot aliens...that is F*ed up.

 

[1069]

No one should have sex with animals, or children, or food....yes food.

I forgot aliens...that is F*ed up.

Why not with food?
(I do agree, though, about the aliens).

 

[FallingPianos]

I think it's a mistake to assume that because some people might not have the same intellect as you (or me, or whoever. "You", in the general sense), or might not have had the same educational opportunities and social advantages, that they are not as savvy, independent, street-smart, etc.
That their instincts about people and about life are not as reliable or trustworthy. That their cognitive skills are not as good.
In my experience, this is not the case.
Some people just communicate better than others, that's all.
That does not necessarily mean that they think better.

I wasn't speaking of intellect in any sort of academic sense. I only mentioned common sense and intuition. meaning the ability to perceive when other people are trying to manipulate you, being comfortable with being yourself instead of following the crowd, that sort of thing.

 

[FallingPianos]

Why not with food?
(I do agree, though, about the aliens).

I didn't think the banana minded...

 

[Doremus Jessup]

NoFX
"Fun Things To **** (If You're A Winner)"

Fun things to ****
Fun things to ****
Fun things to ****
Fun things to ****

**** the front door, **** the back
**** the good girls with the knack
**** the government until they **** you back
**** a muslim, **** a jew
**** fans of blink 182
That's illegal if you were born in '83
yeah, yeah, yeah

**** a bean cheese burrito
**** a bowl of cookie dough
**** the space between the big and neighbor toe
**** a cop, **** a marine
**** a jar of vaseline
**** a calzone with pepperoni
**** a midget, **** a dwarf
**** Chris Cringle with an elf
But before you **** it all... go **** yourself!

 

[1069]

I wasn't speaking of intellect in any sort of academic sense. I only mentioned common sense and intuition. meaning the ability to perceive when other people are trying to manipulate you, being comfortable with being yourself instead of following the crowd, that sort of thing.

Okay. But maybe your experience was not so "exceptional" as you think.
(Not that you yourself aren't an exceptional person, but. You know what I mean).
Maybe it's a pretty typical coming-of-age experience.
Maybe kids are actually a lot smarter than we think, and we don't give them nearly enough credit.

The thing is, Falling, that a couple of hundred years ago, girls were marriagable at menarche.
They went off, ran their households, had their babies. Raised them.

Girls have not, fundamentally, changed.
The world has.
Society has become more complicated, and it is now socially advantageous to young people not to marry or reproduce until they've spent- oh, twenty to twenty-five years preparing to be successful in this brave new world.
But those years of preparation don't have anything to do with sexuality, per se; they have to do with developing one's intellect, learning skills and trades, and whatever else it is that people do in school.

Also, I will concede that the average age of menarche in our society has decreased over the past two centuries (although it plateaued at around 12.3 in the 1950s, and has remained static for the past sixty years, so we likely don't have to worry about it going much lower).
Improved nutrition and general health played a large role in this.

But among the upper classes in our society, sufficient food has always been available, and their average age of menarche was not, 200 years ago, much lower than it is today- it was about 14, and is still 13-14.
Whereas the median age of menarche for the lower socioeconomic classes in past centuries was 17-18, and is now 11 or so.
So yes, nutrition, food availability, medicine, etc, has obviously had a large influence upon the poor, as far as the age at which they are capable of reproducing.
But among the privileged classes, the difference has not been that great.

And yes, I can cite my sources for this information, or at least a couple of them- The Body project: An intimate History of American Girls, by Joan Jacobs Brumberg, and The Feminine Mystique, by Betty Friedan.

So if girls haven't fundamentally changed, and the age at which they are capable of assuming adulthood and successfully fulfilling adult roles such as wife and mother haven't changed, and only our society has changed (by becoming more complex, so that more preparation is needed for successful adulthood than in previous centuries), then the issue is not that pubertal girls are incapable of informed consent.

The issue is that we really, really hope- far more than we did in the past- that they'll choose to postpone early sex and childbearing, because their potential to be successful adults depends on it, whereas in the past, it did not.
Actually, in the past, sex and childbearing and motherhood were their future: all of it.
Now, girls have many other possible futures, and that's why we hope they will wait on sex and reproduction. So that they can make the most of all the other possibilities now on offer.

But again, not because they are incapable of consent.
They are no more "incapable" than their great-great-grandmothers, who were probably married and raising a pack of squalling brats before they were out of their teens.
The world's just different, that's all.

 

[Stinger]

There you go people, the slippery slope pornification of America. It is now OK to have sex with children as long as they consent.

How sad.

 

[Cold Highway]

There you go people, the slippery slope pornification of America. It is now OK to have sex with children as long as they consent.

How sad.

Uh no its not, its still sick and the adult should be locked up as a pedophile.

 

[1069]

NoFX
"Fun Things To **** (If You're A Winner)"

Fun things to ****
Fun things to ****
Fun things to ****
Fun things to ****

**** the front door, **** the back
**** the good girls with the knack
**** the government until they **** you back
**** a muslim, **** a jew
**** fans of blink 182
That's illegal if you were born in '83
yeah, yeah, yeah

**** a bean cheese burrito
**** a bowl of cookie dough
**** the space between the big and neighbor toe
**** a cop, **** a marine
**** a jar of vaseline
**** a calzone with pepperoni
**** a midget, **** a dwarf
**** Chris Cringle with an elf
But before you **** it all... go **** yourself!

I love NoFX! :mrgreen:

 

[buttonpsi]

I I forgot the most important one of all nowadays...

Don't have sex without a condom if you can't support a child.

This is very immoral, and the cause of most of the "abortion immoral" debates.

The people that can't do simple multiplication are multiplying!!!

 

[1069]

There you go people, the slippery slope pornification of America. It is now OK to have sex with children as long as they consent.

How sad.

So, I guess me and my ex-husband raped each other; we were both fifteen when we had our first kid.
Don't diss my fvcking life, Stinger.
Don't diss my children, my husband, me.

I've had nearly twenty years of practice dealing with people like you.
I'm very, very good at it, and I enjoy it. A lot.
You could say it's a hobby of mine, carving people like you up like thanksgiving geese.

 

[buttonpsi]

Why not with food?
(I do agree, though, about the aliens).

Well with the food...unless you are later donating it to charity...goodwill or something (wich is also pretty immoral :lol.

Like wierd Al said.."Don't you know that kids are starving in Japan SO EAT IT! JUST EAT IT!!!"

 

[1069]

Well with the food...unless you are later donating it to charity...goodwill or something (wich is also pretty immoral :lol.

Like wierd Al said.."Don't you know that kids are starving in Japan SO EAT IT! JUST EAT IT!!!"

Does whipped cream count as "food"?

 

[buttonpsi]

Does whipped cream count as "food"?

hm... I guess so, it also could classify as a "drug" if you use the end of the can...hehe

 

[Stinger]

So, I guess me and my ex-husband raped each other; we were both fifteen when we had our first kid.
Don't diss my fvcking life, Stinger.
Don't diss my children, my husband, me.

Since I said noting about your ex-husband, nothing about your life, nothing about your children or you for that matter, I find your response puzzling. What I commented on was your OPINION that is is OK to have sex with children if you believe they are old enough to consent.

I've had nearly twenty years of practice dealing with people like you.
I'm very, very good at it, and I enjoy it. A lot.
You could say it's a hobby of mine, carving people like you up like thanksgiving geese.

People like me who do believe it is immoral to have sex with children, you just carve us up and you have a lot of practice dealing with us?

Why do you have a lot of experience dealing with people who believe it is not OK to have sex with children?

 

[Jerry]

just wondering what the general forum consensus is. of all the above, which do you believe are immoral? why?

The only one I didn't 'check' was "sex with someone more than 10 years younger than you" as that would depend on a person's age.

For me, yeah, me having sex w/a 19 y/o or younger would be imoral because she would be far less mature than myself and likely not make a good spouce; but for a 50 y/o to have sex w/a 40 y/o...everyone's as mature as they're going to get by those ages so no big.

 

[Jerry]

Puberty.
Beyond that, they are not children.

If there's grass on the field.....

 

[1069]

What I commented on was your OPINION that is is OK to have sex with children if you believe they are old enough to consent.

To me, a child is a person between birth and biological sexual maturity.

To you, a "child" is a zygote, an embryo, a fetus, and a born person between the ages of birth and eighteen years old (or is it 21 now?).

I find your definition not only utterly nonsensical, but also detrimental and dangerous to both children and to those you insist are children, although they are not.