The ethics of shagging.

[Sælir]

Ok, first of all... 50% of 12 year olds are having sex? I have a hard time believing that.

Kids are not all the same. Yes, some kids are probably both physically and mentally capable of having sex when they are 12 years old but not all are. That is why we have laws that are tied to a certain age. To protect those that are not. It would be great if we could base each case on the individuals but that would complicate the legal system in each country and make each case way more expensive than it is now.
I think we are talking about different things here as well. I seem to focus on adults (over 18 years old) having sex with children but you on children having sex with children.
Most countries (that I know of at least) differ when it comes to the laws whether it is an adult or another child having sex with that child (we don't have that differentiation in Iceland though).

Why is it ok to have sex with kids when they hit puberty if they want to? Before they hit puberty they might still have urges. Why is it then not ok to do it then?
The law sets up an age to prevent adults to take advantage of children and I think that is ok.

In the case of parents having a say in their children´s sex life I think it´s a good thing.
They are the ones that know the child/individual so they are the ones to decide whether that child really wanted to do what it did or whether it was not mature enough to take that decision. They should know best what kind of person their child is, right?

No, engaging in sexual activity does not mean that you have to become a parent but you should realize that it could happen. Fortunately sexual education is scheduled sooner now than it was when I was young (I don't know how it is in other countries) but I still think it happens too late for many kids. The parents need to talk to their kids about this from a very early age but many parents don't want to. Some because of religious stigma but others because they want to allow their kids to be children for as long as possible and therefore they don't want to discuss "adult" matters with them.

It is impossible to say "don´t let 12 year old girls get pregnant". No birth control is 100%. It can always happen.

Some universities now have sex policies that require the man to obtain affirmative verbal consent to EACH AND EVERY ACT. "May I kiss you?" "May I fondle your left boob?" "May I continue to fondle your left boob while simultaneously stroking your inner right thigh?"

But that is absurd! This does not happen like this in real life. But... maybe if you are making out with someone who wants you to ask every single time you should just stop???
You should realize that it really isn't worth it.

What does that have to do with anything? If she consented to sex, she consented to sex. If she wants to be able to revoke that consent, she should either do so before she falls asleep or not fall asleep. If you give me consent to borrow your car, it doesn't expire merely because you take a nap.

It has everything to do with it! She did consent to sex but you should realize that she wanted to be a participant in this sex. If she falls asleep she is no longer a participant, is she?
Borrowing a car, a dead object, is not the same as "borrowing" someone´s vagina.
I really hope you see the difference.

No, sometimes it means exactly what I said it means. The difficulty is, of course, determining when that is the case and when it's not. But to say that "no always means no" is simply wrong and ignorant of actual human sexual behavior.

No, the fact that she might want you to keep on trying does not mean that the "no" she gave you does not mean no.
It still means no.
She might want you to continue trying because she will eventually say yes but that no still means no. Her saying no does not mean yes. You cannot have sex with her after she uttered that no. That would be rape.

If you want to "fool around" it's up to you to make sure the parameters are set before you begin, as opposed to suddenly deciding to change your mind. This is not to say that you can't change your mind or that doing so doesn't revoke your consent, it merely says that you are responsible for yourself, your safety and the proper operation of your sexual organs and it's up to YOU to control them, and control access to them, which makes it prudent for you not to voluntarily render yourself incapable of revoking consent after having given consent. If you say "Whoo! I'm really drunk! Fuck me hard baby!" and he does, and you pass out in the middle, he's not at fault for fucking you, you are at fault for handing him the keys to the cooch and nodding off. He's perfectly entitled to rely upon your previously-given consent until and unless you clearly and unambiguously revoke it. You don't get to have society protect you from your own misdemeanors by saying that if you get drunk and therefore incapable of revoking consent your sex partner spends the rest of his life in jail for "rape," because it wasn't rape.

No, I don't agree with you there. I am fully allowed to "suddenly change my mind". I am a human being and we change our minds all the time. It is no different when it comes to sex.
Of course it is up to me to control my sexual organs but again, if I become incapable that person should not continue even though I gave my consent beforehand. I am no longer conscious and I did not give anyone the right to use my body even though I was interested in using my body with that person before I became incapable.
If he continues it was definitely rape.

On the other hand, if you get drunk, pass out and THEN he has sex with you, that IS rape because you didn't consent in the first place. However, you still bear a good deal of liability for what happens when you voluntarily intoxicate yourself and hand your body, and the burden of ensuring its safety and health, over to someone you don't trust to do it as you would wish it to be done. Society is under no obligation to protect you from your own stupid mistakes, nor should it because if you don't suffer the consequences of stupid mistakes you'll just keep on making the same stupid mistakes again and again, and it's not fair for other people to be made responsible for your stupidity.

Yes, it is stupid to get so drunk that you are incapable of doing anything but that does not mean that by drinking you are inviting people to take advantage of you. Society is not under any obligation to protect me from my stupid mistakes but that rapist still raped me. I can still file charges and send him to prison. It is not the rapists fault that I made a stupid mistake but it is his fault that he took advantage and raped me.

If I told him he could fuck me and he did... yes, that is on me.

[Hermit]

Ok, first of all... 50% of 12 year olds are having sex? I have a hard time believing that.

Actually, a survey quoted by Guttmacher says that in the USA fewer than 2% of adolescents have had sex by the time they reach their 12th birthday.

Please stand by now for Seth's explanation why he knows better. This may consist of him pointing out that 50% of the many 12 year olds he's met in the course of his lengthy career as a security guard for his dad's herd of cattle told him that they did in fact have sex by then, but 48% also mentioned that they lied about that to the survey takers, their parents and basically everybody, including the persons they had sex with, except of course they couldn't lie to such a nice bloke like goggle-eyed, fatso Seth.

Of course I made all this up, but it'll be something along those lines. It's how our Seth thinks and posts. Get used to it.

[Sælir]

Ok, first of all... 50% of 12 year olds are having sex? I have a hard time believing that.

Actually, a survey quoted by Guttmacher says that in the USA fewer than 2% of adolescents have had sex by the time they reach their 12th birthday.

Please stand by now for Seth's explanation why he knows better. This may consist of him pointing out that 50% of the many 12 year olds he's met in the course of his lengthy career as a security guard for his dad's herd of cattle told him that they did in fact have sex by then, but 48% also mentioned that they lied about that to the survey takers, their parents and basically everybody, including the persons they had sex with, except of course they couldn't lie to such a nice bloke like goggle-eyed, fatso Seth.

Of course I made all this up, but it'll be something along those lines. It's how our Seth thinks and posts. Get used to it.

Yes, I am getting the hang of this

I am just very surprised since I don't think 50% of 12 year old girls have even started their periods.

[Rum]

Seth is justifying the sexual abuse of children. The law concludes that for the safety of all children the element of consent is irrelevant and the act is the sole responsibility of the adult. This is the case in my experience as a social worker too. One of the many reasons I got out of that job was that kids often felt it was all 'their fault', and the bastard that was getting his jollies made them think that.

[Seth]

Seth is justifying the sexual abuse of children.

Fuck off, Rum, I'm doing so such thing.

The law concludes that for the safety of all children the element of consent is irrelevant and the act is the sole responsibility of the adult. This is the case in my experience as a social worker too. One of the many reasons I got out of that job was that kids often felt it was all 'their fault', and the bastard that was getting his jollies made them think that.

And "the law" is always and irrevocably right and can never be questioned or even discussed in a rational fashion, isn't it Rum? Therefore you are justifying the genocide of the Jews by Hitler because, well, it was "the law" that Jews could be gassed and burned at the time.

How much more fucking stupid can your arguments possibly get?

[Seth]

Ok, first of all... 50% of 12 year olds are having sex? I have a hard time believing that.

Actually, a survey quoted by Guttmacher says that in the USA fewer than 2% of adolescents have had sex by the time they reach their 12th birthday.

Please stand by now for Seth's explanation why he knows better. This may consist of him pointing out that 50% of the many 12 year olds he's met in the course of his lengthy career as a security guard for his dad's herd of cattle told him that they did in fact have sex by then, but 48% also mentioned that they lied about that to the survey takers, their parents and basically everybody, including the persons they had sex with, except of course they couldn't lie to such a nice bloke like goggle-eyed, fatso Seth.

Of course I made all this up, but it'll be something along those lines. It's how our Seth thinks and posts. Get used to it.

Hey, Hermit, fuck off.

[Hermit]

I am just very surprised since I don't think 50% of 12 year old girls have even started their periods.

Does it even matter if it is true? Is it even remotely sane to assert that menses is the measuring stick (No pun intended. Seriously, no.) to determine that in principle it's OK to stick a penis into that girl's vagina? Could we reasonably expect a five year old to give informed consent? Or a twelve year old?

This crap comes from a bloke who approves of menses as being the point in time from which sex with a girl is OK, yet does not rail against dumb age restrictions on matters less important than the chance of becoming a parent, such as driving a car, voting for a political party or drinking alcohol. His opinions are seriously garbled.

No matter. We've had that discussion before, and I can pretty much predict the drift of Seth's reply. Essentially, it will amount to no more than posting the same shit on a different day.

[Rum]

Seth is justifying the sexual abuse of children.

Fuck off, Rum, I'm doing so such thing.

The law concludes that for the safety of all children the element of consent is irrelevant and the act is the sole responsibility of the adult. This is the case in my experience as a social worker too. One of the many reasons I got out of that job was that kids often felt it was all 'their fault', and the bastard that was getting his jollies made them think that.

And "the law" is always and irrevocably right and can never be questioned or even discussed in a rational fashion, isn't it Rum? Therefore you are justifying the genocide of the Jews by Hitler because, well, it was "the law" that Jews could be gassed and burned at the time.

How much more fucking stupid can your arguments possibly get?

You sir are the worst kind of fool. An intelligent person who uses his wits to justify his twisted views. I always regret engaging in discussions with you and will refrain from doing so in future. Justifying genocide? Fuck off.

[mistermack]

When Seth stated that he thought 50% of kids of 12 are sexually active, he didn't give any link for such a fact.
But anyway, what the fuck does sexually active mean? It's typical Seth Bollocks. A meaningless phrase wrapped up as factual.

I was sexually active at 12, but I certainly didn't fuck anyone, or anything, in the full sense of the word, till years after that.

Of course, being an American farm boy, sexually active might have a totally different meaning for Seth.

[Hermit]

Of course, being an American farm boy, sexually active might have a totally different meaning for Seth.

I can't remember him ever saying if he had a younger sister, but perhaps he has fond memories of those special times with his father?

[mistermack]

Of course, being an American farm boy, sexually active might have a totally different meaning for Seth.

I can't remember him ever saying if he had a younger sister, but perhaps he has fond memories of those special times with his father?

I seem to remember a statistic where more than half of American country boys had experimented with farm animals, long before their sisters reached 12.

That's why those broncos and bulls buck and try to throw them off, when they try to ride them.

[Sælir]

I am just very surprised since I don't think 50% of 12 year old girls have even started their periods.

Does it even matter if it is true? Is it even remotely sane to assert that menses is the measuring stick (No pun intended. Seriously, no.) to determine that in principle it's OK to stick a penis into that girl's vagina? Could we reasonably expect a five year old to give informed consent? Or a twelve year old?

This crap comes from a bloke who approves of menses as being the point in time from which sex with a girl is OK, yet does not rail against dumb age restrictions on matters less important than the chance of becoming a parent, such as driving a car, voting for a political party or drinking alcohol. His opinions are seriously garbled.

No matter. We've had that discussion before, and I can pretty much predict the drift of Seth's reply. Essentially, it will amount to no more than posting the same shit on a different day.

No, of course it doesn't matter. But according to his reasoning they are "ok to screw" when they start their periods so I find it strange that 50% of them have started having sex when less than 50% have started their periods.

[Hermit]

...according to his reasoning they are "ok to screw" when they start their periods so I find it strange that 50% of them have started having sex when less than 50% have started their periods.

Yes, well, let me remind you that you are interacting with a poster who has extraordinary ways of reasoning.

He is also someone who is of the opinion that

biology has provided an excellent indicator of the change between a protected child and a presumptively sexually mature young person: for girls it's menarche, for boys it's ejaculation

and wistfully remarked

I vote for the good old days when you were a man at 15, or whenever you could toss a bale on the wagon by yourself, and you were a woman when you became capable of having babies.

[tattuchu]

I'm curious to know what Seth meant by "sexually active." Others appear to assume it refers to sexual intercourse but I'm guessing it refers to any sexual activity, including with one's self (masturbation). If that's the case then the 50% figure seems fairly accurate.

[tattuchu]

I used to have a gay roommate, Brian. Brian liked to tell me about the man who lived next door when Brian was a boy of twelve. Brian loved to watch him do yardwork, shirtless. He'd sit at his window and spy on the man and he'd masturbate while doing so, fantasizing about having sex with him. I think it's pretty safe to say that, given the opportunity, Brian would have jumped at the chance to shag this fella. There would have been no question that the sex was consensual. He wanted that guy's cock really, really bad.
In another unrelated conversation, however, Brian told me that any adult who has sex with a kid is a sick bastard. Which seemed like a contradiction to me, given that 12-year-old Brian would have done anything to have sex with his man crush. In Brian's mind it was perfectly okay to want this guy sexually. So how did he expect the man to participate in this sex, if such a thing was inexcusable in Brian's mind. If it was okay for boy-Brian to want sex with the man, why would it not be okay for the man to reciprocate those feelings?
I never asked Brian what he thought about this. Wasn't worth getting into. Too touchy a subject. But I think this anecdote illustrates the thorny nature of...I dunno...thorny-natured things, or whatever.