41 year old man walks free as judge callls 13 year old a Predator

[Shahad]

Little tear in my eye, someone else can peek past the veil enough not to hate me

I don't hate you. It would be pretty silly to hate someone for having opposing views on a sub- oh wait.

[Sorrior]

I don't hate you. It would be pretty silly to hate someone for having opposing views on a sub- oh wait.

Same for me...I don't hate easily...Not at all only a select few things can even lead to me holding a grudge differing views is certainly not among them...I DO however vehemently disagree and possibly even despise his views and methodology. But hate him? No.

[Xarkan]

The system would not be prospective credentials. The system would be retrospective if harm is done. You might say: "But wait, if you're only addressing it after harm is done, then you're not doing anything to prevent it!", to which I would reply that the prevention is in the punishment/consequence of harm; similar to how we deal with other forms of harm, such as murder. We put a punishment on that harm to dissuade people from doing it.

No i might say "if you are only addressing it after harm is done then you are punishing people who have no chance to know if they do right or wrong creating systemic uncertainty and fear" in a system where you honestly cannot know if a 25 year old is or is not old enough .. granted not protecting prepubescents would also offend me but i am easily offended that way

The law needs be clear on what you can and cannot do.

[Huehuecoyotl]

Changing that would result in less crime

you are completely right. if we simply make it so that NOTHING is illegal, we would be able to wipe crime out in a single stroke. how great would that be?

of course, you may not enjoy living in a world like that quite as much as you think you would. wild west doesnt even start to cover it.

[Deleted]

Do american men are so run out of women they're preying on children?

[Destruktion]

Yes, the onus is on me. You're right. I'll get to that in a sec, but first I just want to say that my arguments don't stem from my desires (other than the desire to make the world a better place). I am indeed stubborn, but I would also say that I've given everyone's argument a fair chance - as in, I've considered them all instead of dismissing them for no reason (if they are in fact arguments, vs the often slander I get especially from Djalil).

I'm sorry, but based on what I've seen I can't take this at face value.

So, benefits. The benefits are not for the pedophiles. I don't give a shit about pedophiles, especially in their contemporary form, which is pretty negative. The benefits are for society, and for normal people, both those who give and receive the attention. In our current society we place so little value on emotional attachments (thanks in part to money, capitalism, and individualism, which have all been exacerbated for the purpose of social control for those individuals who can game the system). I would like to see that changed. Changing that would result in less crime, more altruism, fewer psychological problems, and a host of other social benefits. One way of changing it would be to increase sexual freedom. One result or method of increasing sexual freedom would be to allow sexual relations between broader groups of people. I could go on for days about this. But there are other posts I have to reply to.

That's a made-up problem, Quetzl. There are plenty of emotional attachments in today's day and age, more so than ever before really. Expressing emotion overtly has been viewed as a sign of weakness in the past. All of your hopes are nothing more than that: hopes. They have no basis in reality. Sexual freedoms have never been more free either. In fact, there's not much freer you can get without getting into other problems.
You're making up problems and posing a radical solution to them, which is another red flag.

It might be worth noting that prepubescent children don't come out in droves for anything. I also have no interest in having sex with children, because I grew up in this culture just like you did. This is the slander I'm talking about. It's senseless.

I'm using logic just as you are. There is no one with more to logically gain from legalized pedophilia than a pedophile. Everyone else knows where to draw the line.
If that's the case, then perhaps prepubescent children are perfectly fine where they are, and not at all interested in getting into polyamorous group relationships where they can pair-bond with no innate benefit for themselves.

Sorry, you expose all your biases with this forthright opener.

I have no biases, I'm just calling a spade a spade.

..and if it's not droves, but just a handful of them that want to? Like the girl this thread is about?

Did you miss the modifier "prepubescent?" Because I don't take too much issue with 13-year olds doing what 13-year olds do.

lol. Letting someone else do it is not the same as doing it yourself

I would be oh so curious to see what would happen if you had a child of your own, from your own seed.
Don't care for hypotheticals, I just want to see what would actually happen.

[Deleted]

Yes, the onus is on me. You're right. I'll get to that in a sec, but first I just want to say that my arguments don't stem from my desires (other than the desire to make the world a better place). I am indeed stubborn, but I would also say that I've given everyone's argument a fair chance - as in, I've considered them all instead of dismissing them for no reason (if they are in fact arguments, vs the often slander I get especially from Djalil).

So, benefits. The benefits are not for the pedophiles. I don't give a shit about pedophiles, especially in their contemporary form, which is pretty negative. The benefits are for society, and for normal people, both those who give and receive the attention. In our current society we place so little value on emotional attachments (thanks in part to money, capitalism, and individualism, which have all been exacerbated for the purpose of social control for those individuals who can game the system). I would like to see that changed. Changing that would result in less crime, more altruism, fewer psychological problems, and a host of other social benefits. One way of changing it would be to increase sexual freedom. One result or method of increasing sexual freedom would be to allow sexual relations between broader groups of people. I could go on for days about this. But there are other posts I have to reply to.

It might be worth noting that prepubescent children don't come out in droves for anything. I also have no interest in having sex with children, because I grew up in this culture just like you did. This is the slander I'm talking about. It's senseless.

- - - Updated - - -



This is exactly true. However, there's an opposite force also at work - and that's the force of cohesion within a species. Humans have innate mental functions that serve to reinforce this cohesion - partly by fearing things that are different. So a balance between variety and homogeneity needs to be found. I tend to think that balance can be organized in such a way that you can have an externally homogenous system with internal variety - sort of like division of labor, but in terms of non-social traits.

- - - Updated - - -



The system would not be prospective credentials. The system would be retrospective if harm is done. You might say: "But wait, if you're only addressing it after harm is done, then you're not doing anything to prevent it!", to which I would reply that the prevention is in the punishment/consequence of harm; similar to how we deal with other forms of harm, such as murder. We put a punishment on that harm to dissuade people from doing it.

- - - Updated - - -



Model organism. Look it up. Seriously, just read the wiki page. Even if it's just the first sentence.

- - - Updated - - -



Little tear in my eye, someone else can peek past the veil enough not to hate me

Ahah slander. You've got balls ill give you that.
Now, sorry for interrupting, please get back at debating how soon would be suitable to fuck kids.
Of course you're not attracted by kids no no no. You're just "arguing" for the cause.
If I knew where you live I would send the police down to get your pc checked for child porn.

[Paladin885]

go figure, anyone who is passionately bias in a case like this is going to curse those who are against them. We saw it last month... its just sad that those who are against "them" are receiving death threats. It's as if people (ADULTS) are not even thinking logically about how the law works. The law doesnt always work in your favor kiddies... it works in the most just and unbiased way possible which, sadly, pisses people off sometimes.

Ahah slander. You've got balls ill give you that.
Now, sorry for interrupting, please get back at debating how soon would be suitable to fuck kids.
Of course you're not attracted by kids no no no. You're just "arguing" for the cause.
If I knew where you live I would send the police down to get your pc checked for child porn.

what, did he rustle your jimmies or something?

he made an argument about society and you clearly have a bias against the topic he argued. 200yrs ago you would have sounded like the weird one. I'm not agreeing with him, I am just making an observation.

[Sorrior]

go figure, anyone who is passionately bias in a case like this is going to curse those who are against them. We saw it last month... its just sad that those who are against "them" are receiving death threats. It's as if people (ADULTS) are not even thinking logically about how the law works. The law doesnt always work in your favor kiddies... it works in the most just and unbiased way possible which, sadly, pisses people off sometimes.



what, did he rustle your jimmies or something?

he made an argument about society and you clearly have a bias against the topic he argued. 200yrs ago you would have sounded like the weird one. I'm not agreeing with him, I am just making an observation.

No 200 years ago MY points might have fit in...Quetzl promotes even ore pubescent sex a whole nother beast....One that has NEVER been accepted.

[Deleted]

go figure, anyone who is passionately bias in a case like this is going to curse those who are against them. We saw it last month... its just sad that those who are against "them" are receiving death threats. It's as if people (ADULTS) are not even thinking logically about how the law works. The law doesnt always work in your favor kiddies... it works in the most just and unbiased way possible which, sadly, pisses people off sometimes.



what, did he rustle your jimmies or something?

he made an argument about society and you clearly have a bias against the topic he argued. 200yrs ago you would have sounded like the weird one. I'm not agreeing with him, I am just making an observation.

Do you know what quetzl's point is? No so why do you talk about it? Would you let your 40 years old neighbour fuck your 8 years old daughter? No? Then you don't agree with quetzl's "theories".

Why oh why do people talk without knowing what they're on about.

- - - Updated - - -

Also this notion that 200 years ago everyone was fucking kids and the world was a happier place shows abyssal ignorance.

[Leonidas]

A 13-year old girl is just as capable of soliciting sex as any older girl. I'd call them both equally guilty. Technically, people like her are enablers to people like him.

[Aristeus]

A 13-year old girl is just as capable of soliciting sex as any older girl. I'd call them both equally guilty. Technically, people like her are enablers to people like him.

13 year old girl, under developed brain that can't read consequence, and can be easily coerced into sex with adults is partly to blame and she's an enabler to pedophiles.

So are girls who wear mini skirts and get raped enablers for looking good?

[Sorrior]

Do you know what quetzl's point is? No so why do you talk about it? Would you let your 40 years old neighbour fuck your 8 years old daughter? No? Then you don't agree with quetzl's "theories".

Why oh why do people talk without knowing what they're on about.

- - - Updated - - -

Also this notion that 200 years ago everyone was fucking kids and the world was a happier place shows abyssal ignorance.

Oh I for one would not call it happier but many things contributed to that...We may differ in views and opinions on this but believe me when I say at least as far as Quetzls extremism goes we definitely agree...

Also as much as I disagree with your views on this I like ya LOL. You're views and beliefs are well thought out which makes debating with you quite fun as well as having good points and ideas even if I dob't fully agree.

[Deleted]

A 13-year old girl is just as capable of soliciting sex as any older girl. I'd call them both equally guilty. Technically, people like her are enablers to people like him.

Except younger people are more vulnerable to manipulation than older people with experience. Older people with experience can manipulate someone that is young and naive easier than someone their age and who is experienced.

I don't have much of an issue with people close to eachother in age having sex with eachother but when the age gap is 10 years or more then it becomes rather problematic in my opinion. Even more so when the adult is old enough to be the persons mother/father.

[Sorrior]

13 year old girl, under developed brain that can't read consequence, and can be easily coerced into sex with adults is partly to blame and she's an enabler to pedophiles.

So are girls who wear mini skirts and get raped enablers for looking good?

Different matters entirely. This girl did what many 13 year olds do...She sought out sex in her case with an older man...Ok disgustingly older but she did it of her own free will...The development argument honestly isn't as good as you seem to think going by the 25 mark some use I for one am in the it never stops developing camp.

A 13 year old will often seek sex and short of doing horrible things to theur brains whether by medicine or other things we won't stop it...
Now if you think blocking puberty to match human laws is an even semi good idea then you are one of the few peopld I could wish harm upon...And that takes ALOT of doing.

So in many ways he was correct whether you want yo acknowledge it or not..

Oh and a woman in a mini skirt getting raped NEVER asked for sex....This girl did and ONLY BY HUMAN AKA MANMADE LAW did she say no...In reality she said yes she consented and OTHERS are taking that consent away.

Girls her age WILL seek sex and WILL have it if they so desire....Should this man have accepted? No but he did and she consented.

- - - Updated - - -

Except younger people are more vulnerable to manipulation than older people with experience. Older people with experience can manipulate someone that is young and naive easier than someone their age and who is experienced.

I don't have much of an issue with people close to eachother in age having sex with eachother but when the age gap is 10 years or more then it becomes rather problematic in my opinion. Even more so when the adult is old enough to be the persons mother/father.

I've known a few girls who will almost exclusively look outside their normal age range....

[Deleted]

I've known a few girls who will almost exclusively look outside their normal age range....

I know some do. The big majority sticks to those that are no more than 6 years older than them though.

[Deleted]

Off-base? I myself have recoiled many a time at much of what he's written, yet I don't possess the intellectual disingenuity to actually deride him for his lack of reasoned logic. None of what he's said was just a pedophilic notion pulled out of his ass. The reason I'm able to see that is because I am also able to see the fact that several of my views on the matter, many of which are so often in conflict with his, are influenced in no small part by the zeitgeist of the society I've been nurtured in. There simply is no objective basis on which to accuse him of anything other than keeping an outrageously open mind. The fact that he persistently upholds such wildly unpopular views and manages to back them with surprising amounts of logical/empirical validation is worthy of commendation in itself, even if I don't think those views themselves are.

Inb4 I'M called a pedophile/pedo-apologist.

Are you joking velaniz, his notion of neoteny he keeps waving as truth is only one theory the scientists are debating. There are theories that even refuse the existence of neoteny in the first place. And until now I am still to find written evidence of neotenic traits causing SEXUAL attraction on males.
His idea of sex is completely wrong. As in, he takes ONE aspect of the whole sexual intercourse experience and focuses on it a carefully avoiding all the rest. He does NOT think sexual intercourse with a kid by itself can be traumatising and rather he thinks is a "social construct". He thinks society would be better with a mentor practically teaching kids how to fuck.

What of all this sounds "reasonable" to you?

[Leonidas]

13 year old girl, under developed brain that can't read consequence, and can be easily coerced into sex with adults is partly to blame and she's an enabler to pedophiles.

So are girls who wear mini skirts and get raped enablers for looking good?

As if underage pregnancy and sex crime wasn't rampant. You sir, do not have a clear view of how people with "underdeveloped brains" process wanton desire. Whether for profit or pleasure it's still unlawful, even to a child. No matter what you say, soliciting sex is still breaking the law - period. Casting blame on the buying party does make it okay for her to do it. Your view of "innocence" is quite narrow minded, breaking the law is just that: breaking the law.

[Sorrior]

I know some do. The big majority sticks to those that are no more than 6 years older than them though.

Oh I know and that's good in many ways....But the oned who don't are dangerous when mixed with our current legal system and social bias...

- - - Updated - - -

Are you joking velaniz, his notion of neoteny he keeps waving as truth is only one theory the scientists are debating. There are theories that even refuse the existence of neoteny in the first place. And until now I am still to find written evidence of neotenic traits causing SEXUAL attraction on males.
His idea of sex is completely wrong. As in, he takes ONE aspect of the whole sexual intercourse experience and focuses on it a carefully avoiding all the rest. He does NOT think sexual intercourse with a kid by itself can be traumatising and rather he thinks is a "social construct". He thinks society would be better with a mentor practically teaching kids how to fuck.

What of all this sounds "reasonable" to you?

And note by kids Quetzl includes PRE pubescents...

[Deleted]

As if underage pregnancy and sex crime wasn't rampant. You sir, do not have a clear view of how people with "underdeveloped brains" process wanton desire. Whether for profit or pleasure it's still unlawful, even to a child. No matter what you say, soliciting sex is still breaking the law - period. Casting blame on the buying party does make it okay for her to do it. Your view of "innocence" is quite narrow minded, breaking the law is just that: breaking the law.

Your point would make sense if she was an adult able to formulate informed consent. Unfortunately she's just 13. Ever heard of oversexualisation during puberty?
That's why the blame falls entirely on the man. Some teens oversexualise, does that mean we should take advantage of that?
No. Exactly.

- - - Updated - - -

As if underage pregnancy and sex crime wasn't rampant. You sir, do not have a clear view of how people with "underdeveloped brains" process wanton desire. Whether for profit or pleasure it's still unlawful, even to a child. No matter what you say, soliciting sex is still breaking the law - period. Casting blame on the buying party does make it okay for her to do it. Your view of "innocence" is quite narrow minded, breaking the law is just that: breaking the law.

Sorry and what exactly does "underage pregnancy" have to do with this case?