pedophilia: double standard

[Dags90]

What about pregnancy?

As I've said before, the similar reactions people take towards Male/male statutory relationships would lead me to think that the victim is not a major part of the equation. I could scarcely imagine the public reaction if an attractive young woman was charged with assaulting an unusually mature looking 13 year old.

 

[Miumaru]

I dont think you get MY point. It is more damaging to have a penis enter you than your penis to enter another.

At 13, a girl has a completely woman sized vagina. Any arguments about a "man" not fitting into a teenage girl are without merit.

I think you're both missing the point that the gravity of all rape is in the emotional trauma, not the physical injury. It's about a gross violation of enterprise, not physical harm.

What about pregnancy?

What about dick rot?

Is this a common occurance? Is this as likely to happen as a pregnancy could? If it is a signinicantly smaller possibility, then we can just go all day on what ifs. But accidental pregnancy is something I hear more about, even among consenting and of age partnerings. So if "dick rot" is 1 in 10 or something, maybe. If its 1 in 1000000, thats different.

 

[Miumaru]

What about pregnancy?

As I've said before, the similar reactions people take towards Male/male statutory relationships would lead me to think that the victim is not a major part of the equation. I could scarcely imagine the public reaction if an attractive young woman was charged with assaulting an unusually mature looking 13 year old.

He was talking about girls (the poster I responded to)
Ive mentioned male male situation. I would imagine it also worse for a Man/boy than Woman/boy, since the boy is being entered.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

I would say its really deep rooted sexism, most would just assume that the male knows what he's doing, whereas we see the female as more naive and innocent

 

[RatRace123]

Legally, there's no difference, in the eyes of THE LAAAAAH, it's all the same (or at least I thought it was)

Though since men are often, wait no, always seen as the agressors in situations like that, a boy getting some from a woman just makes that boy a pimp, rather than making the woman a dangerous predator.

 

[Dags90]

Ive mentioned male male situation. I would imagine it also worse for a Man/boy than Woman/boy, since the boy is being entered.

Now you're simply being heteronormative and presumptuous. You're assuming sexual roles for homosexuals by ascribing traditional heterosexual biases onto them. You've completely dismissed the idea of the younger partner being the "active" party for no stated reason. You've also assumed that such relations must entail anal sex, again without stated reason. I would also recommend you read up on how safe anal sex can be, and note that the anus doesn't grow much.

 

[manaman]

You are hanging on to the fact I used the word rape. While forceful rape would do it more, even conseting sex, being entered is more physically taxing than entering, male or female. I was simply initially saying why a girl/Man situation may be seen worse than a boy/Woman situation, assuming both are just vaginal. Whats the worse that can happen? The boy gets the woman pregnant, the perp gets stuck with it (and the baby too unfortunatly) but what about the other? No 13 year old is ready for pregnancy. But even not just that, what about boy/Man? Certainly that would be more damaging to the boy than if he were to do an adult woman. I am not saying the boy with the woman isnt damaged emotionally by the situation, but what about the other two? Certainly those are obviously physically more damaging, and likely also more emotionally so. Now if you still are stuck because I used the word rape since it was simpler than jumbling up how I say it, then its just you not listening.

I am having a nice laugh now. The part's are almost literally made to go together. Do you really think casual sex is traumatic to a women in anyway? I mean it can be, a pat on the back can be physically harmful if you do it rough enough. Even then parts can get a bit sore for both parties.

The law is intended to prevent children from being taken advantage of by manipulative adults. The prospect of pregnancy should not enter into sentencing unless a pregnancy actually occurred, and that is part of the problem. You are trying to judge people on what ifs and could'a beens.

If as you now say you where simply pointing out part of why the bias exists then you are correct. There is also the women on a pedestal bit that is a hold over. Women being something to be protected, it makes the violation of a girl seem that much worse.

 

[TheHoboHunter]

This is more about the male/female double standard regarding sex then anything else and has fairly little to do about pedophilia

 

[Dr. wonderful]

Actually, a guy named Barry Lyga made this book called Boy toy [http://barrylyga.com/new/boy-toy.html], which deals with the boy was sexually abused by his teacher.

I love this guy books.

 

[Miumaru]

I dont think you get MY point. It is more damaging to have a penis enter you than your penis to enter another.

At 13, a girl has a completely woman sized vagina. Any arguments about a "man" not fitting into a teenage girl are without merit.

I think you're both missing the point that the gravity of all rape is in the emotional trauma, not the physical injury. It's about a gross violation of enterprise, not physical harm.

What about pregnancy?

What about dick rot?

Is this a common occurance? Is this as likely to happen as a pregnancy could? If it is a signinicantly smaller possibility, then we can just go all day on what ifs. But accidental pregnancy is something I hear more about, even among consenting and of age partnerings. So if "dick rot" is 1 in 10 or something, maybe. If its 1 in 1000000, thats different.

STDs in general are less preventable and more damaging than accidental pregnancy. Pregnancy can be prevented by using condoms or the pill, even if that fails abortion is always an option. My point is that accidental pregnancy is an easily solvable and preventable problem, and should not be regarded as a major issue. However it is regarded as such by the media.
STDs can affect both genders, and are more common than accidental pregnancies.

Short version: Accidental pregnancies, not that big of a deal, risk of STDs, very big deal.

Ok. Fair enough. I would certainly feel worse for any one who got an STD from it. My point is, whoever is more hurt is a bit worse off than those less so. So yes, a boy who gets an STD from a woman is worse off than a girl who does not get an STD or pregnant from a man. But a pregnant 13 year old has it worse than a boy who DOESNT get an STD from a woman.

 

[Miumaru]

Ive mentioned male male situation. I would imagine it also worse for a Man/boy than Woman/boy, since the boy is being entered.

Now you're simply being heteronormative and presumptuous. You're assuming sexual roles for homosexuals by ascribing heterosexual biases onto them. You've completely dismissed the idea of the younger partner being the "active" party for no stated reason. You've also assumed that such relations must entail anal sex, again without stated reason. I would also recommend you read up on how safe anal sex can be, and note that the anus doesn't grow much.

You are hanging on to the fact I used the word rape. While forceful rape would do it more, even conseting sex, being entered is more physically taxing than entering, male or female. I was simply initially saying why a girl/Man situation may be seen worse than a boy/Woman situation, assuming both are just vaginal. Whats the worse that can happen? The boy gets the woman pregnant, the perp gets stuck with it (and the baby too unfortunatly) but what about the other? No 13 year old is ready for pregnancy. But even not just that, what about boy/Man? Certainly that would be more damaging to the boy than if he were to do an adult woman. I am not saying the boy with the woman isnt damaged emotionally by the situation, but what about the other two? Certainly those are obviously physically more damaging, and likely also more emotionally so. Now if you still are stuck because I used the word rape since it was simpler than jumbling up how I say it, then its just you not listening.

I am having a nice laugh now. The part's are almost literally made to go together. Do you really think casual sex is traumatic to a women in anyway? I mean it can be, a pat on the back can be physically harmful if you do it rough enough. Even then parts can get a bit sore for both parties.

The law is intended to prevent children from being taken advantage of by manipulative adults. The prospect of pregnancy should not enter into sentencing unless a pregnancy actually occurred, and that is part of the problem. You are trying to judge people on what ifs and could'a beens.

If as you now say you where simply pointing out part of why the bias exists then you are correct. There is also the women on a pedestal bit that is a hold over. Women being something to be protected, it makes the violation of a girl seem that much worse.

Im just gonna go. Im choking on all these (some fancy) words shoved in my mouth.

 

[Lonan]

My first problem with you're words is that pedophilia implies being more attracted to the pre-pubescent than the post-pubescent. 13 is during puberty, not pre=pubescent. My issue is it puts a 13 year old in the same category as a 3 year old, which I find insulting as a human being, and as someone who was just as much a human being at 13 as I am now at 20. No changes really, just no more voice cracks and no more acne. So from a mental perspective that was insulting to me, but no worries, I know you didn't mean it, and I don't care.

As for a double standard, it's a trillion times more likely that sex between a 26 year old male a 13 year old female is not consensual than between a 13 year male and a 26 year female. It's not a double standard, it's common sense rooted in reality. It would be just awesome to have sex with an attractive female teacher, but if you were a girl, you probably would want it to be with someone you're age and a more emotional experience and all that jazz. Also, a 13 year old girl's vagina is not fully sized, and it would be very painful for her to have sex with a grown man. It's pretty simple. There's a lot more potential for harm when the larger person is male than if the larger person is female (and potentially and rather likely physically weaker in the latter case)

So I see no double standard.

 

[oktalist]

The two teachers in the OP's example are just as bad as each other IMO. If the majority of people really agree with the double standard described in the OP, then we are pretty fucked as a species.

 

[Miles Tormani]

He was talking about girls (the poster I responded to)
Ive mentioned male male situation. I would imagine it also worse for a Man/boy than Woman/boy, since the boy is being entered.

So, since this is still all a pretty much hypothetical situation...

And if the adult woman is using a strap-on?

 

[capin Rob]

Ive mentioned male male situation. I would imagine it also worse for a Man/boy than Woman/boy, since the boy is being entered.

Now you're simply being heteronormative and presumptuous. You're assuming sexual roles for homosexuals by ascribing heterosexual biases onto them. You've completely dismissed the idea of the younger partner being the "active" party for no stated reason. You've also assumed that such relations must entail anal sex, again without stated reason. I would also recommend you read up on how safe anal sex can be, and note that the anus doesn't grow much.

You are hanging on to the fact I used the word rape. While forceful rape would do it more, even conseting sex, being entered is more physically taxing than entering, male or female. I was simply initially saying why a girl/Man situation may be seen worse than a boy/Woman situation, assuming both are just vaginal. Whats the worse that can happen? The boy gets the woman pregnant, the perp gets stuck with it (and the baby too unfortunatly) but what about the other? No 13 year old is ready for pregnancy. But even not just that, what about boy/Man? Certainly that would be more damaging to the boy than if he were to do an adult woman. I am not saying the boy with the woman isnt damaged emotionally by the situation, but what about the other two? Certainly those are obviously physically more damaging, and likely also more emotionally so. Now if you still are stuck because I used the word rape since it was simpler than jumbling up how I say it, then its just you not listening.

I am having a nice laugh now. The part's are almost literally made to go together. Do you really think casual sex is traumatic to a women in anyway? I mean it can be, a pat on the back can be physically harmful if you do it rough enough. Even then parts can get a bit sore for both parties.

The law is intended to prevent children from being taken advantage of by manipulative adults. The prospect of pregnancy should not enter into sentencing unless a pregnancy actually occurred, and that is part of the problem. You are trying to judge people on what ifs and could'a beens.

If as you now say you where simply pointing out part of why the bias exists then you are correct. There is also the women on a pedestal bit that is a hold over. Women being something to be protected, it makes the violation of a girl seem that much worse.

Im just gonna go. Im choking on all these (some fancy) words shoved in my mouth.

GAH! People, Can we stop argueng and agree kid fucking is fucked up?

 

[manaman]

Im just gonna go. Im choking on all these (some fancy) words shoved in my mouth.

You should probably work on making your points clearer and concise if you don't want them misunderstood. Nobody is putting words into your mouth, at most there might be a misunderstanding of your point, but nobody is putting words in your mouth just responding to what you wrote.

Seriously, you don't want people to think you are talking about rape, then don't use the word rape. Might help to clear that up after the first reply as well rather then waiting four or so replies into the conversation to tell the person you didn't really mean it.

 

[NickCaligo42]

Boy does an older woman: No medical complications can arise. Okay, sure, he can get her pregnant or she can give him a venereal disease or vice-versa, but those are the same problems you can get having sex anywhere else, as anyONE else. Long story short, underage cock has no more or fewer risks than mature cock. Strictly medically speaking, that is.

Girl does older man: ENORMOUS medical complications. An underage pregnancy, however many measures are taken against it, can be fatal even at early stages as an immature body isn't built to handle it yet and will manifest its rejecting of the fetus in the most nonsensical but deadly ways you could never imagine. With a mature woman plenty of complications can arise as well--eclampsia sucks no matter who you are--but there's even more complications that can arise with an under-aged girl and they all happen far more frequently.

That's about as tangible and concrete a reason as I can come up with other than delving into psychological nonsense about dominance and submission that I don't feel like talking about. Just goes to show it's a biological double-standard too.