Small women and sexuality

[SadakoMoose]

I recently got into a discussion with some friends regarding a law that Australia passed back in 2010 wherein they stated that they would ban pornography featuring women that "looked" younger than 18. It was vaguely written, and overstated by the news media, but it did inspire an interesting discussion.

As a society, can we tell smaller or more petite women that they can't be sexual just because they look too much like minors and MIGHT be titillating pedo or ephebophiles?
I don't personally think so, but this issue is interesting to me because of it's implications to our beliefs regarding the roles of personal freedom versus societal fear.
To define what we're talking about, let's create an extremely plausible hypothetical example:
"Trudy" is a 23 year old woman of sound mind.

She's 4'11, and 95 lbs. (155 cm, 43 kg). More than that, she has a very young looking face. People regularly confuse her for a high school girl or younger. However, "Trudy" is a fully developed, heterosexual woman. She has needs and desires, like everyone else. So then; does our society, in it's revulsion at pedophilia, tell her that she's not allowed to BE sexual at all? Is it ok to make the assumption that any man that would be her partner is automatically suspect of being a pedophile? Again, I don't think so, but I've definitely heard people say as much in person.

So, where do you think the balance between personal freedom and societal mores is? Would you date a woman of that size? Would you be comfortable having sex with that woman if you two wanted to take your relationship to that level? Are you shorter or younger looking, and have you met with discrimination as the result of how you look?

 

[krazykidd]

If you are of age , you can do whatever the hell you please. Most women would kill to look that young. I would definately have sex with a woman that looks young ( then again i have little to no standards in regards to sexual partners ). And who and what is this society you speak of? Are people going to stop and throw rocks at me based off an assumption? I think the general population wouldn't give a fuck , unless the lady litterally looks like she's 12. Even then, worst that would happen is we get a few stares . As long as she's of adult age , i fail to see any problem with this.

Edit: as for porn , as long as she's not being advertised as being a minor , and there's a disclaimer saying all the participants are over 18 , there is little problem, hell hook me up and i'll make some amature stuff out of spite ![small] this is a joke , unless someone is up for it *wink*[/small]Now if they advertised her a being a minor ( or left it ambiguous on purpose) then that's a problem. Not only would that be false advertising, it's morally reprehensible ( even for me ).

 

[MysticSlayer]

Why should we limit a woman who's past the age of consent from doing something she wants to do simply because of our societal fears regarding pedophiles and the fact that she looks a certain way (which she has absolutely no control over)? I mean, what's so different between that and the argument that woman shouldn't wear skimpy clothes because it might attract a rapist?

With that said, it would be pretty hard to not get society to accuse any man of being in a relationship with that girl as being a pedophile. At the same time, though, I would at least hope that the two could be able to pursue the relationship they want in as much peace as they can have.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

This reminds me of a court case that happened in Puerto Rico. Basically a tourist was stopped at customs, and in his bag he had a porn video of a porn star named Lupe Fuentes, who looked underage in the video. The guy was arrested and put in on trial for child pornography charges. The only way he was released was Lupe Fuentes actually flew from America to Puerto Rico, showed the prosecutor her passport, which showed that she was 23, and then in court gave testimony to the fact that she was over 18 when the video had been filmed (all evidence that the prosecutor could have gotten with a 5 minute phone call to the production company that had made the video).

The whole thing would be funny if it wasn't so stupidly pathetic.

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=30190

 

[DementedSheep]

With pedophilia and teenagers isn't more an issue of exploitation/ them not being of an age deemed to have enough life experience to give consent not that being attracted to people who look that age that is an issue? I met a girl a few days ago who is 16 but looks 20 and also know someone who is 24 but looks and sounds (her voice, not what she talks about) 14. It isn't that uncommon.

Stupid extreme example time: If you had someone who had a disorder that made them look 10 years old or younger and was shooting porn videos I admit that would be very very disturbing to me but even still I would have to give that a pass due to it being between consenting adults. It would make me wary of anyone who watched it but nothing would need to be done unless they did something that is actually illegal and harms someone.

 

[bigwon]

I'd imagine the context would be a good enough way to determine whether or not you should bother.

It's all in the mannerisms and who they associate with....and if I'm getting a hard on (harharhar!)
Your pretty safe when approaching a relatively mature individual, regardless if they turn out being in the danger zone young. Meaning it's pretty easy to shrug off and go on with life....although this is coming from someone who doesn't really associate with people at all.

Pretty much the same stuff you apply to all other women. Otherwise seeing that the 14 year old look isn't really that attractive to many I suppose I could just throw you in there with the ugly ones.

tough shit.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Define "looks younger". My height and weight are exactly the same as "Trudy's", and occasionally people ask me what year of high school I'm in, only to apparently get their mind blown when I tell them I'm in my third year of university. That said, I also often meet people who act equally surprised when I tell them I get mistaken for a fifteen year old, telling me I look exactly my age.

The closest thing I've come to experiencing discrimination is getting carded all the time. I don't mind or anything. It's difficult to tell someone's age just by looking. It only gets awkward when some stranger starts hitting on me while I'm at work or in public, and I can't help but wonder whether they're one of the people who think I look twenty or one of the ones who think I look fifteen.

 

[chinangel]

Define "looks younger". My height and weight are exactly the same as "Trudy's", and occasionally people ask me what year of high school I'm in, only to apparently get their mind blown when I tell them I'm in my third year of university. That said, I also often meet people who act equally surprised when I tell them I get mistaken for a fifteen year old, telling me I look exactly my age.

The closest thing I've come to experiencing discrimination is getting carded all the time. I don't mind or anything. It's difficult to tell someone's age just by looking. It only gets awkward when some stranger starts hitting on me while I'm at work or in public, and I can't help but wonder whether they're one of the people who think I look twenty or one of the ones who think I look fifteen.

My brother gets this all the time, 'cept he's nearly 30 and he not only gets mistaken for being underaged, but also a woman. It drives him bonkers and I laugh my arse off at his misfortune.

Seriously though, I don't see why people who have youngish looks or those who are attracted deserve trouble or any legal justification against them.

 

[Colour Scientist]

First of all, I don't see why you're equating banning porn featuring these petite women with telling them they can't be sexual but whatever.
I assume that the pornography being banned isn't porn with the title "23 year old Trudy' but more 'teen sluts, yadda yadda'. The problem is that they're being marketed as teenagers, not with the women themselves.


I've never seen any kind of societal pressure that says that petite women can't be sexual. I'm not saying it doesn't exist somewhere but I think the pressure is usually directed at other people for specifically targeting petite, young-looking women. Even then, it's usually just the odd stare from people who think that it's an older man with an underage girl.
Usually, people who know the age of the woman have no problem.

 

[Rob Robson]

As someone who almost exclusively gets attracted to between very short (below 1.65 ish metres) and very tall (more than 1.90 metres) ladies, I couldn't possibly give a single fuck what some judgmental people think about me dating anyone, nor had I ever really thought about it until I saw this thread, and most of my serious relationships have been representative of those two attractions. I'm 1.96 metres myself, if that matters to your research.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I assume that the pornography being banned isn't porn with the title "23 year old Trudy' but more 'teen sluts, yadda yadda'. The problem is that they're being marketed as teenagers, not with the women themselves.

Because 18 and 19 year olds don't exist right?

I don't see the problem of porn marketed as being "teen." I mean, they aren't implying the girls are 13, and every legitimate porn production business has really strict rules about who they hire, so everyone who watches the porn knows there isn't anyone under 18, and that most of the "teens" are probably actually in their early twenties.

 

[Abomination]

I would rather pedophiles have access to a sort of "release" than be forced to engage in potential statutory rape.

When we start making laws because we fear a small minority might do something wrong in a tangential manner we begin to lose sight of what the actual problem is - underage people not legally being able to consent to sex.

Young people are often times very attractive, I think there's some biological impulse there for most people: young = virile, young = fertile, young = unsullied. Certainly it can pass into more "extreme" territory but better to allow pornography where no minors are abused than to force people with these urges only one avenue of satisfying themselves...

On that note, what if your wife or girlfriend dresses up as a "teenager" and you have sex with them? Should that now be considered illegal because of "pedophile thoughts"?

Thoughts... yeah. This is essentially trying to enforce a thought crime.

 

[Colour Scientist]

I assume that the pornography being banned isn't porn with the title "23 year old Trudy' but more 'teen sluts, yadda yadda'. The problem is that they're being marketed as teenagers, not with the women themselves.

Because 18 and 19 year olds don't exist right?

I don't see the problem of porn marketed as being "teen." I mean, they aren't implying the girls are 13, and every legitimate porn production business has really strict rules about who they hire, so everyone who watches the porn knows there isn't anyone under 18, and that most of the "teens" are probably actually in their early twenties.

Yes, that is what I said.

Maybe you don't have a problem with it, I didn't even say if I had a problem with it or not, but I was just trying to explain that is where the law is coming from. Some of it does imply that the girl is quite young, the whole idea of forbidden "jailbait" or whatever.
Also, there are underage girls in porn, not all pornography comes from the tightly regulated industry. It's not what we're discussing here but saying there isn't anyone under 18 when you can't know that, isn't right.
A vast majority of the women will be over 18 but, as I said, the law is trying to prevent pornography that markets them as underage girls.

 

[Dirge Eterna]

When I was 19 I married a girl who was 4'11 and about 120. I was 6'1 and about 190. She was 21 and I would constantly get hassled about robbing the cradle and why was I dating a little girl. We even got approached by the police a few times because they thought I was taking advantage of her. Everyone just assumed that she was underage and I was a bad guy.

 

[Dwarfman]

I recently got into a discussion with some friends regarding a law that Australia passed back in 2010 wherein they stated that they would ban pornography featuring women that "looked" younger than 18. It was vaguely written, and overstated by the news media, but it did inspire an interesting discussion.

As a society, can we tell smaller or more petite women that they can't be sexual just because they look too much like minors and MIGHT be titillating pedo or ephebophiles?
I don't personally think so, but this issue is interesting to me because of it's implications to our beliefs regarding the roles of personal freedom versus societal fear.
To define what we're talking about, let's create an extremely plausible hypothetical example:
"Trudy" is a 23 year old woman of sound mind.

She's 4'11, and 95 lbs. (155 cm, 43 kg). More than that, she has a very young looking face. People regularly confuse her for a high school girl or younger. However, "Trudy" is a fully developed, heterosexual woman. She has needs and desires, like everyone else. So then; does our society, in it's revulsion at pedophilia, tell her that she's not allowed to BE sexual at all? Is it ok to make the assumption that any man that would be her partner is automatically suspect of being a pedophile? Again, I don't think so, but I've definitely heard people say as much in person.

So, where do you think the balance between personal freedom and societal mores is? Would you date a woman of that size? Would you be comfortable having sex with that woman if you two wanted to take your relationship to that level? Are you shorter or younger looking, and have you met with discrimination as the result of how you look?

Considering the age of consent in Australia is 16 my thoughts on this are who the heck cares?

To answer your question though, I think that if you are legally the appropriate age to do something and you want to do it, then you can darn well do it everyone else can go jump.

That being said the law you stated was about pornography. Unless your friend want to join the porn industry I don't see how this could affect her.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

The law isn't stopping Trudi in that example from having whatever sex life she chooses. She simply cannot be in an adult film for the sole purpose of titillating (ie. porn). I don't see any issue with that. It could quite easily be argued that having someone who looks like a minor and pretends to be one for the camera is as bad as having an actual minor in front of the camera. This *isn't* an issue of consent or even causing harm to minors, the issue is child porn.

I think adult films are on the whole more damaging to women and society than any benefit they might offer and making material targeting paedophiles wallets and lusts isn't something that should be encouraged.

PS. This should be in R&P, not OT.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Er...no, society can't stop that.

Likewise, it's not illegal for adults to pretend to be little children if they are into that. Or pretend to be Nazis, for that matter, or any number of other things society doesn't really approve of.

 

[JoJo]

The law isn't stopping Trudi in that example from having whatever sex life she chooses. She simply cannot be in an adult film for the sole purpose of titillating (ie. porn). I don't see any issue with that. It could quite easily be argued that having someone who looks like a minor and pretends to be one for the camera is as bad as having an actual minor in front of the camera. This *isn't* an issue of consent or even causing harm to minors, the issue is child porn.

I think adult films are on the whole more damaging to women and society than any benefit they might offer and making material targeting paedophiles wallets and lusts isn't something that should be encouraged.

I disagree, the main reason child porn is illegal is because it has a high risk of causing harm to the minors involved, and anyone consuming it is fuelling the market for more. In most countries, it would be recognised that since Trudi is an adult, she has the right to use her body as she wishes and that includes starring in an adult film. In fact, the existence of porn involving women like Trudi allows men who like them 'young' the opportunity to watch porn without funding the exploitation of minors, why would you ban their only legal outlet? We aren't even talking about paedophilia here, which is an attraction to prepubescent children, and however petit our hypothetical girl Trudi is I very much doubt her 23 year old body looks anything like prepubescent.

 

[sanquin]

I think adult films are on the whole more damaging to women and society than any benefit they might offer and making material targeting paedophiles wallets and lusts isn't something that should be encouraged.

Another person with that mindset huh? I really do not see how porn is more damaging to women than beneficial to society. Heck, I don't see how porn is damaging at all. Furthermore, have you ever stopped to consider that you don't have to be a paedophile to enjoy young looking women? You can just be young yourself. Or actually be attracted by young women. If an 18 year old is allowed to marry a 50 year old, why can't that same 50 year old watch porn with an 18 year old in it?

This is a case of government overstepping it's boundaries imo. Yes the government is there to run the country, decide on what's best for us, and other such things. But said decisions should not impede on a person's fundamental rights. Like freedom. Who is the government to dictate whom can or can't be in porn once they're adults by law?

 

[Maze1125]

It could quite easily be argued that having someone who looks like a minor and pretends to be one for the camera is as bad as having an actual minor in front of the camera.

How? How on Earth can it be as bad?

If you put an actual child "in front of a camera" then it's an actual child that's being hurt and abused. If you don't, then there isn't a child being abused.

Yes, it can be argued that simulated child porn is bad, but it cannot be argued that it is as bad as real child porn, because it is factually not. (Unless you don't think that a child being abused is bad.)