Categories
creepy men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA rapey reddit statutory rape apologists

Again with the 14-year-old girls

Was Aqualung a Men's Rights Redditor?

So a bunch of the regulars on Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit have their collective knickers in a twist about dudes getting called “pedophiles” just for saying they think 14-year old girls are hot. Because that’s “ephebephilia,” dontchaknow, not pedophilia! And besides, thingsarebad argues

Normal heterosexual males will generally have sexual attraction for pubescent females of child-bearing age, from puberty till they start to get old and gross (late 20s, early 30s usually haha).

That’s pretty much “eww.” But so is the rest of the discussion, really, from this “joke” about all women being as immature as children to this heavily upvoted claim that feminists have created a “pedo-scare … to criminalize healthy and normal male sexuality,” to  this Evo-Psych-flavored argument for lowering the age of consent.

Is it just me or are dudes who get indignant when people don’t carefully distinguish between ephebephilia and pedophilia just really really creepy?

Is “the right to lust after underage girls without having to feel icky about it” really a Men’s Rights issue? Why this preoccupation with 14-year-old girls, on r/mensrights and Reddit generally?

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

374 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Yoon
Yoon
9 years ago

Can we have a citation from a blog other than False Rape Society? Of course they’re going to claim ridiculous overbloated statistics re: false rape accusations. It’s like me saying “all pigs are actually naturally blue; they just paint them pink!” and then citing a blog called They’re Lying To You About Blue Pigs as my source. It’s laughably biased, and it makes you look weak and easily influenced.

JUANDELACRUZ
JUANDELACRUZ
9 years ago

Indeed, indeed. True, true. Though to be fair, as a general rule. nobody really listens to anyone on the internet anyway.

Joanna
9 years ago

Funny. I know plenty of “normal heterosexual males” who consider prepubescent girls as “too young” for them.

I don’t think I ever considered myself “sexy” when I was 14. I had sore lopsided breasts, spots, greasy skin, greasy hair, dandruff, braces, hairy legs etc etc. Oh wait, isn’t that the majority of 14 year old girls?

chocomintlipwax
9 years ago

I bet TAB and NWO both invented a time-traveling watch for Pepsi (to view the effect of time travel on deliciousness), but had their idea stolen and then were fired by Steve Jobs for being far too awesome for their own good.

Thinking about it, I feel like trolls here should just have their remarks replaced with, “I KNOW YOU ARE, BUT WHAT AM I??” since it would give the same effect but take less time to read.

qwert666
qwert666
9 years ago

@ Joanna

The quotation states clearly:

“Normal heterosexual males will generally have sexual attraction for PUBESCENT females of child-bearing age”

Not:

“Normal heterosexual males will generally have sexual attraction for PREPUBESCENT females of child-bearing age”

I think the problem is in defining at what point a girl is considered a woman.

“I don’t think I ever considered myself “sexy” when I was 14. I had sore lopsided breasts, spots, greasy skin, greasy hair, dandruff, braces, hairy legs etc etc. Oh wait, isn’t that the majority of 14 year old girls?”

You make a good point here: as I don’t actually associate with or spend time with girls of this age group I think I might well be confusing my memories of what the girls in my school looked like with the reality of what fourteen year old girls would actually look like to me now.

As it happens, this topic is making me feel rather uncomfortable, I think it best if these are my last words on the matter.

Joanna
9 years ago

“The quotation states clearly:

“Normal heterosexual males will generally have sexual attraction for PUBESCENT females of child-bearing age””

My bad. Still, I don’t think any of my male friends find kids sexually attractive, child-bearing or not. If they do, they certainly don’t complain how it’s unfair that they aren’t allowed to have sex with them.

qwert666
qwert666
9 years ago

@ Joanna

“If they do, they certainly don’t complain how it’s unfair that they aren’t allowed to have sex with them.”

Yeah, this is where it’s gets serious for me. I don’t think there would be a lot of men who would, genuinely, like to see the age of consent lowered. I’d be very suspicious of the motives of someone who would want this to happen. I think that regardless of the age when a male or female is “physically” a man or woman, you still need to have some level of protection for them: there’s no reason to think that they are “adults” as such just because they have adult bodies. The question is where to draw the line, I’d say sixteen is about right, or maybe even a little older.

Anthony Zarat
9 years ago

Germaine Greer described the “The Beautiful Boy” as an attempt to address modern women’s apparent indifference to the teenage boy as a sexual object and to “advance women’s reclamation of their capacity for, and right to, visual pleasure”

If a man keeps his attraction for teenage girls in his mind, he is a pedophile.
If a woman (and feminist leader) talks openly of her attraction for teenage boys, writes a book about it, puts pictures of semi-nude boys in the book, she is called a visionary.

Can you guys even understand the magnitude of the double standard here?

Joanna
9 years ago

“If a man keeps his attraction for teenage girls in his mind, he is a pedophile.
If a woman (and feminist leader) talks openly of her attraction for teenage boys, writes a book about it, puts pictures of semi-nude boys in the book, she is called a visionary.”

Eh…no… that’s just gross. I don’t even know what crevice of your arse hole you pulled that from. Ever see Notes on a Scandal? Cate Blanchett wasn’t considered a visionary in that.

qwert666
qwert666
9 years ago

@ Anthony Zarat

I haven’t read “The Beautiful Boy” but I’ve read of many news stories of women who have been convicted of having sex with under-age boys.

The stories themselves are bad enough but what I find truly disturbing is the many comments that are often left in the comments sections of the articles. Every single time there’s comments form women and MAINLY men that go something like; “it must be every teenage boy’s dream to have sex with a grown woman”, “I bet he enjoyed it”, “this is hardly a crime”, “you can’t rape man” etc. etc. I kid you not, every such news article I’ve read has many, many comments like this.

It seems as if some people (men and women) in society think that the sexual abuse of boys by women is somehow not a crime.

Pecunium
9 years ago

juandelacruz “far left feminists” was what, a term of endearment? Man-hating was an expression of tendresse

I figure anyone who thinks someone who argues with him deserves to be called a harridan, deserves to be called a fuckwit.

And again we see the, “It’s legal somewhere, so it ought to be legal here. First… I’ll bet you don’t know what the average age of consent is in the US.

I’ll be sure to explain that the next time I refuse to seel someone an electrical appliance on a Sunday (which is illegal in Bergen Cty. New Jersey), or refuse to hear a petition for legal redress because it’s not made in Norman Frence (as some petitions need to be on one of the Channel Islands).

Second, I’ll bet you don’t know the age of consent in Portugal, Germany, or Canada is. (no looking at Google and coming back to say you knew it now)

Denmark 15
Finland 16
France 15
Iceland 15
Ireland 17
Netherlands 16
New Zealand 16
Norway 16
Canada 16

Germany 14, but An exception is when the older partner is aged over 18 and is “exploiting a coercive situation”, where compensation is offered, in return for sex, in which case the younger person must be aged over 18 years. In addition, it is illegal for someone aged over 21 to have sex with someone under 16 if they “exploit the victim’s lack of capacity for sexual self-determination”.

Which is the argument for age of consent laws in general. We’ve done this dick dance once or twice. No one here is of the opinion there are not teens (even younger teens) who are capable of making a, reasonably, informed decision on when to have sex.

But they are few, and far between. Older people are able, by virtue of experience, and the social currency which comes from having an older boyfriend/girlfriend, to exploit those children who are not yet able to make that choice.

So the balancing act is to decide where the tipping point is, at what age does the greater majority of the group consist of people able to make an informed decision.

That’s the “age of consent”. Is it perfect? No. Is it the best compromise which can be made, in the interests of protecting the vulnerable? Yeah, I think so.

Rutee Katreya
9 years ago

It just amuses me that man-haters here are so willing to label men they don’t know as bottom-dwelling perverts, when really we’re merely normal heterosexual males who just don’t take kindly to having their quite normal sexuality demonized, just as you would not in our position.

No, fucking people who can’t consent is not normal sexuality. I oppose every human having sex with young kids; Mary Kay LeTourneau was no more cool than your stupid ass.

Rutee, why such vitriolic profanityy? Name-calling is just so undignified, even for a forum this, don’t you think? Especially, since the posts you are replying does not contain any flames, it seems uncalled for you to flame in response.

You’re defending fucking young children, and misogyny besides. You earn every little bit of vitriol you get. I notice you didn’t respond to any of the substantive points, but you’re a stupid troll; I expect no better. You couldn’t even defend your stupid point based on fictional characters (And while we’re at it, the Stahn/Rutee romance was awful. Give me the Leon ending any day, erry day.)

Tch tch tch, what a firecracker of a harridan you are hehehehehehe.

Someone who uses gendered insults like ‘harridan’ has less than zero right to complain about insults aimed their way; insults based on class of people are never okay, you fucking asshat. Insults based solely on actions are fine; harridan is one of many words reserved to insult women, which makes it a gendered insult, and an insult based on class rather than actions.

And yet Hugh Hefner continues to have his own ever-replenishing harem hehehehehe…

You’re one of those idiots who thinks they’re hilarious, aren’t you?

Yes, the relationships can’t be sustained, so he makes new ones.

Seriously though, do all intimate heterosexual relationships have to be perfectly equitable in order to be happy? Even in America alone, they have the Taken In Hand/Promise-Keepers for the religious far-right and BDSM/Gor for the secular far-left.

What you don’t know about American politics would fill the Midwest, apparently. I’ll just go ahead and inform you that BDSM and Gor aren’t the same thing, and they’re not specifically for the political left.

I also don’t *really* think all women above the age of 25 are old hags; I simply wanted to point out the ridiculousness of older women thinking they can compete with young college students in the looks department. Seeing as our culture has convinced most people to believe that it’s sick for an old man to get involved with a young woman, whereas old women who get involved with young women are glorified as cougars,

Actually most of society is still fine with ~40 year old men dating 20 year old women. You’re conflating 60 year old men with 40 year old women, and that’s informing this. I’m not sure if that says anything about you.

I imagined the response if the sexes were reversed, and laughed at the ridiculousness of this blatantly sexist society – against men and boys.

Wage, hiring, promotion gaps. % of women in positions of power vs. % of men in positions of power. % of wealth controlled by women, % of wealth controlled by men. You’re stupid, TAB.

Oh, btw, 14 seems to be reasonable, since it did work for that utopia, Canada, for the longest time, until the Conservatives changed it fairly recently.

14 is a wee young. 16 is a wee bit young, but it gets to the point where we have trouble stopping it, and it’s considered old enough to ruin your life in a car crash so I have trouble with the idea of stopping a heterosexual relationship on similar grounds.

All age of consent laws need to permit stuff between people 2 years apart.

Everything about normal heterosexual male sexuality is demonized. Men are perverts for being attracted to young, fertile, attractive women. Men are perverts for being naturally polygamous. Men are perverts for not valuing status to the degree that women do, rather focusing on fertility and physical beauty. Men treat women as sex objects (let’s not talk about the fact that women treat men as status objects).

Dude, nothing about this is natural. You’re just declaring it is to begin with.

I actually don’t want polyamory demonized, but polygamy should be anyway; that’s just a demand for a lot of people on hand to service you. And women treating men as status objects is even more demeaned than men treating women as sex objects; Gold Digger, and similar epithets, are far more common and biting than just ‘pervert’.

Women demand special treatment. They demanded – and accepted – that they got special treatment over little fucking children on the Titanic. They demand – and accept – that they get special privileges over men in college, in the legal system, in every aspect of society.

And on the Lusitania, they were shoved aside and they died even more disproportionately than the men.

What wa your point, again?

I found your comment the only one worth responding to. Men are polygamous, and women are hypergamous. Men and women are not the same, and they are not “polyamorous” to the same degree. Men’s natural polygamy, characterized as “sex addiction” by the mainstream media and women who think their SO’s shouldn’t masturbate to other women (almost all western women), is, like I said, natural. Just as women’s hypergamy, meaning they seek out high status men who get their knickers wet, is natural.

I’ll bet you’re one of the many stupid morons we get who doesn’t actually know what Hypergamy means, and doesn’t know what it correlates to. Protip: It doesn’t mean what MRAs think it means, and there is no evidence that it is ‘natural’.

So you’re saying women today have absolutely nothing to complain about? I agree..

No, stupid, we’re saying it was worse in the past. Things aren’t equal yet, and women are still disadvantaged. But you’re just a fucking moron, this is for the benefit of lurkers.

Cheap shot. Even geniuses are fallible, my dears..

Yeah…. no.

You didn’t get some minor detail wrong. The entire basis of your argument was utterly, obviously ahistorical and anti-reality to anyone, *ANYONE*, with the most remote bit of education on history OR World Politics. If you knew about the history of pretty much any location on the planet, you’d find your statement self evidently wrong. If you knew about anywhere in Africa (The entire continent, mind), Asia (Again, the entire continent), or South America right now, or about more than a surface depth view of North America, or Europe, you’d know your statement was motherfucking stupid. So motherfucking stupid, that it is beyond the pale of stupid. It wraps around the wrong-o-meter and STILL lands on wrong. You are a fucking imbecile, and nobody should treat you with any more seriousness than a capering monkey (And yes, I hate monkeys, that’s why I’m willing to compare them to you).

Everywhere else? The traditional rules still do very much apply..

No, actually, that’s simply not true in general, in a number of developed countries. For instance, Ireland and the UK have hypergamy rates so low that they’re actually better explained by random chance, and are similar to men’s. It also varies wildly by country; there’s really good evidence that it’s really not a ‘natural’ thing that is done. I suspect you’ll find it’s more common in either countries with massive income inequality, or massive gender inequality, I’m not sure which would be more relevant.

.

Indeed, indeed. True, true. Though to be fair, as a general rule. nobody really listens to anyone on the internet anyway..

Not when they can’t support their claims. I at least gave you an idea of what statistics to look for.

[blockquote]It seems as if some people (men and women) in society think that the sexual abuse of boys by women is somehow not a crime.
I suspect this is more a narrative by men, a side effect of their ‘every male is sexual and wants to have sex all the time.’ This is not just an issue for young boys abused by caretakers (‘Consenting’ or not; you can’t consent if you’re under the age of consent, period). This is an issue for all male survivors. The narrative that all men want all sex, created by men, for men, and to the benefit of men, has the effect of hurting men who are raped. This isn’t news; feminists oppose this narrative. It’s not just because it hurts women, as much as it shocks you. We oppose it because it hurts men. Patriarchy has always hurt some men too. There’s a good video that relates to some of how toxic masculinity hurts men, but I just can’t remember the name offhand. Try googling it on Google videos, just toxic masculinity?

Pecunium
9 years ago

Things are bad: Let me buy you a clue.

No one here is against age dichotomous relationships. I was in one for 10 years, with a 12 year gap between she and me. She was 21, I was 33.

The important thing… she was 21, not 12.

A four year gap, and you in your late 20s. Who cares? And you are bragging about it? Wow. I’m impressed. It takes a really confident dude to be willing to brag about having a partner who is four years younger than he is.

And a really deep thinker to know that it’s all about looks, which is why cougars have such a hard time getting laid.

Pecunium
9 years ago

TAB: [blockquote]such that it’s difficult to see how an equitable relationship can be sustained with the difference in experience – it is, in short, a situation that is ripe for abuse. And that’s bad[/blockquote]

And yet Hugh Hefner continues to have his own ever-replenishing harem hehehehehe…

Hef is a classic example of how that power dynamic usually goes. Didn’t he just get jilted? How is it he can keep a harem, but not a partner?

Might be something to do with the power dynamic (not the age gap), and his having all the money, and the access to things those women want. Which leads to dependency. Which leads to a struggle for the dependent partner to assert themselves, which leads to breakup.

My grandfather got married three time (divorced, died, survived him). He liked, so it seems, women in their early twenties. So the first marriage (in the 1920s) was of someone his own age.

His next marriage (my grandmother) was someone about 15 years younger than he was.

His third marriage had about a 40 year age gap.

What there wasn’t was a power imbalance. They were, as much as the age allowed, equals.

There is no way a 14 year old can be the equal (romantic, financial, social) of someone in their 20s, much less someone in their 30/40/50s.

qwert666
qwert666
9 years ago

@ Rutee

“There’s a good video that relates to some of how toxic masculinity hurts men, but I just can’t remember the name offhand. Try googling it on Google videos, just toxic masculinity?”

I’ll take a look at that.

Rutee Katreya
9 years ago

Whoa, that was dumb of me, wrote my post buying into stupid narratives. If 16 is old enough to risk your life in a car, it’s old enough for any sexual relationship, hetero, homo, poly, whatever.

Hershele Ostropoler
9 years ago

TAB:

Land owners were granted the right to vote. Not male land owners. Land owners.

Only true in New Jersey. AFAIK every other jurisdiction extended the franchise to non-landowning men before granting it to women. Even New Jersey had excluded women by 1807, and continued to do so for 113 years.

TAB:

“Uh, you brought up fertility as one of the three main things men are attracted to in women”

No, I didn’t. Do you not understand the English language?

I said the following, quite clearly:

“Men are perverts for being attracted to young, fertile, attractive women.”

Yup, there it is, one of the three things.

TAB:

My transcript shows I’m summa cum laude.

That’s weird. Normally when someone brags about that sort of thing, it’s the most recent thing they’ve accomplished in life, but you said you’re in your late 20s.

qwert:

I’ve read of many news stories of women who have been convicted of having sex with under-age boys.

[…]

It seems as if some people (men and women) in society think that the sexual abuse of boys by women is somehow not a crime.

I’m going to point out that these are the first and last lines of the same comment and leave it at that.

qwert666
qwert666
9 years ago

@ Hershele Ostropoler

“It seems as if some people (men and women) in society think that the sexual abuse of boys by women is somehow not a crime.”

Okay, replace the words “a crime” with “wrong”.

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

Oh, dear. What Baby NWO, I mean TAB doesn’t realize, is that he’s overwhelmingly average. And here he is trying so hard to be special.

Pecunium
9 years ago

TAB:Men are perverts for being naturally polygamous

I should like ot point out to you, my dear boy, that NWO (a true bastion of feminism, if ever there was one) would agree with that statement.

And, oddly, most MRAs are really upset if women want to have sex with more than one person, ever.

Bit of hypocrisy there no? Oh, wait… I see, the stupid use of the idea that men and women are so very different and men are, “driven” to want more than one person, by nature and women are coerced into thinking they want more than one person by those evil feminists.

Men don’t really value fertility – they value hot bodies and cute faces, which are indications of fertility and good DNA, whether you like it not.

This is not true. A hot body is a cultural artifact, and in no way reflects genetic health (and genetic health is limited to “those things which don’t kill me before I can have offspring). I have an ex who has terrible allergies. Life-threatening ones. Allergies which are likely to kill her if she gets pregnant.

Her body… hot as all get out.

Pecunium
9 years ago

TAB: Jesus Christ.. the goddam titanic (again). Lets look at the rules for siegecraft… expel the women and children from the fort. Let them starve, because the men doing the fighting matter, and the women/children don’t.

Seems a bit at odds with the idea that women/children are always coddled.

Land owners were granted the right to vote. Not male land owners. Land owners.

Um… no. The requirement to own land and vote was rescinded well before the right to vote, at all, was granted to women (in either the UK, or the US).

Susan B. Anthony (at a time when all men in the US, regardless of property [so long as they were white] were allowed to vote) was arrested and On January 24, 1873, a grand jury of twenty men returned an indictment against Anthony charging her with “knowingly, wrongfully, and unlawfully” voting for a member of Congress “without having a lawful right to vote,….the said Susan B. Anthony being then and there a person of the female sex.”for attempting to vote.

She was convicted.

Pecunium
9 years ago

Things Are Bad: Your sick hatred for men disgusts me, and I’m sorry that due to your hatred I can’t read any of the rest of your comment. Please, next time, try not to display your hatred so openly, as it honestly makes me not only sad, but sick.

So you come in, say foul things about women (and men), and then get upset when someone calls you, (such a manly man, able to get a woman four years younger than he is) a delusional misogynist?

Is it the delusional? Is that the part that got under yuor skin? Because it can’t be the misogynist. They say the truth hurts, but you revel in your misogyny so completely that I figure it must be a sign of pride to have it recognised.

Maybe it’s just that you don’t like to read the clear concepts, or face the refutations.

Having one’s cluelessness pointed out can be vary hard to take.

Pecunium
9 years ago

Crap, very hard to take.

As a stopped clock once said, Even genius is fallible.

Joanna
9 years ago

“Men are perverts for being naturally polygamous”

Men are naturally polygamous.

Pervs are lazy for not controlling that nature.

captainbathrobe
9 years ago

Yes, many (but not all, obviously) women find me enormously attractive, especially when considering my intelligence, sense of humor, and charm.

Wow, TAB. Only you can prevent narcissism.

Pecunium
9 years ago

Yes, many (but not all, obviously) women find me enormously attractive, especially when considering my intelligence, sense of humor, and charm., but even so I never expected to have a story worth sending into Penthouse Letters….

captainbathrobe
9 years ago

My wife is 8 years younger than I. I have a friend who’s wife is several years older than he. Everyone is happy, yet no one is 14. Imagine.

qwert666
qwert666
9 years ago

@ Pecunium

“Crap, very hard to take.”

Hey Pecunium, from previous experience: I highly recommend this . 😉

Pecunium
9 years ago

qwert666: I don’t quite know what to make of your comment.

vacuumslayer
9 years ago

To whomever said women in their 30’s have trouble competing with younger women…I’d just like to say that…yeah…no….actually I have NO problem in that department. But then I don’t look at other women as “competitors,” I look at them as individuals. Some of them are younger than I am, some of them are thinner than I am, some fatter, some of them will arouse a man in a way I won’t and I may do the same for a man in way they won’t.

I view women as individuals..and guess what–I view men that way too!

qwert666
qwert666
9 years ago

@ Pecunium

“I don’t quite know what to make of your comment.”

It was a joke man. I’m assuming the hyperlink worked?

Anthony Zarat
9 years ago

“Is it just me or are dudes who get indignant when people don’t carefully distinguish between ephebephilia and pedophilia just really really creepy?”

The line between DOING and FEELING does not require one to “carefully distinguish”.

It is the line between the greatest of evil and the greatest of good.

On one side of this line are people (men and women) who do a terrible harm.

On the other side of this line are people (men and women) who feel a terrible desire — but have the compassion, the grace, and the strength NOT to act on that compulsion.

On one side of this line are the people who we should most DISDAIN.

On the other side of this line are the people who we should most ADMIRE.

How many of you could say, with honesty, that you would have the strength and courage to set asside your entire sexual nature, because the desire that you felt was morally wrong and/or illegal?

How many of you who mock and denigrate the heroic struggle of human beings who face the beast within themselves and WIN? I suspect that many of you, faced with the same awful choice, would embrace the evil within yourselves and victimize the young and/or helpless without remorse.

Many of the same people who so pompously proclaim your superiority to the “vermin” who FEEL a terrible desire.

The difference between FEELING and DOING is simply the difference beteen good and evil. There can be no greater difference. If we lose the ability to distinguish between the two, we have truly lost our humanity.

Pecunium
9 years ago

Ok, I rather thought it might be, but it might also have been taken as a dig, and I didn’t want to do you an injustice by supposing the latter, if you meant the former.

ozymandias42
9 years ago

Joanna: But if men want to they don’t have to control their polygamy. Polyamory exists, you know! 🙂

qwert666
qwert666
9 years ago

@ Pecunium

Yeah, I do remember saying you were full of shit a while back! I guess that confuse matters. If it helps any, I retract my statement that your’e full of shit: but if you genuinely do find it hard to crap then I’d consider popping a few of those dulcoease tablets down your neck. 😉

Pecunium
9 years ago

Antz: No one here is saying one can’t lust after 14 year olds. qwert did a good job of explaining the difference.

As to this: How many of you could say, with honesty, that you would have the strength and courage to set asside your entire sexual nature, because the desire that you felt was morally wrong and/or illegal?

How many of you who mock and denigrate the heroic struggle of human beings who face the beast within themselves and WIN? I suspect that many of you, faced with the same awful choice, would embrace the evil within yourselves and victimize the young and/or helpless without remorse.

What do you mean?

Are you asking if I (since I can’t answer for anyone else) think I could resist a pretty young thing who was actually too young to give legal consent?

Yes. I’ve done it. Some years ago (when I was younger) there was a young women I took to be about 16 (I was just shy of 20). She was young, but 16 is liminal, (and I was younger too). She flirted with me (and with a number of other men; it was that sort of environment). She was, however, coy about her age. Some weeks went by (we were working an event that lasted over 6 weekends, plus the rehearsal time, which was when we met).

At some point some one else found out how old she actually was (the context of the event was such that markers of age, such as school, companions, etc. weren’t present). She was 13.

A little later she made a pass at me.

And I turned her down. I had another (14 year old) make a pass at me (a couple of years before that. Perhaps I was a prettier teen than I thought at the time; or perhaps I treated them as human beings, I don’t know). I turned her down too.

They were both attractive. I know they were both sexually active at about 16. I could probably have seduced either of them, at that point. But the age gap (because of experience), and the emotional advantage (because of their prior crushes) made it something that, no matter how charming the idea of a few hours of slippery fun might have been had (and probably enjoyed by all) the morality of it was wrong.

I’d have been taking advantage of them.

Not taking advantage of them wasn’t heroic. It wasn’t something to be proud of, nor to boast of. It wasn’t some great moral victory. It was just the right thing to do.

That you see it as some great struggle, a day to day fight between good and evil; an ongoing trial to “face the awful beast”, says a lot more about you than I wanted to know.

Pecunium
9 years ago

qwert: Thanks. I’ve been impressed with the way you’ve dealt with the way your words are (and have been taken). I didn’t want to chime in at the time, because I didn’t want to seem to be either crowing, nor piling on.

The points you make about desire/action are valid.

It comes up a lot, actually, when talking about looking at people. Being attracted isn’t objectification.

Thinking a young person who is attractive, is attractive is fine.

Trying to get them into bed, not so fine.

vacuumslayer
9 years ago

When I was 15, I had boyfriend–for a short time–who broke up with me because I was too young. He was 21, and while he apparently thought I was very cute, the idea of making out with a 15-year-old skeeved him out a bit. He kinda broke my heart, but I reckon he was acting honorably. It DOES happen.

Anthony Zarat
9 years ago

“That you see it as some great struggle, a day to day fight between good and evil; an ongoing trial to “face the awful beast”, says a lot more about you than I wanted to know.”

If you think I have terrible impulses that I control through force of will, then perhaps you should thank me. A little compassion would probably also be appropriate.

As to your example, it makes no sense. Based on your description of events, I conclude that your feelings of attraction for women are mainstream. Some women in their early to mid teens can look 18, so you acted with caution, which is the appropriate thing to do. So what? None of this is unusual or noteworthy.

Do the reverse. Imagine an 18 year old woman who (biologically) looks very YOUNG for her age. Imagine that she also acts, and dresses, like a 12 year old girl. Anyone looking at her would THINK she is 12. Now imagine a man who is strongly attracted to her BECAUSE of her pre-pubescent appearance. THIS is the man I am talking about. THIS is the man who I admire (assuming he does not act upon his desires).

The point is, no FEELING is ever wrong. Only actions can be wrong. When we start making feelings illegal or immoral, we forgoe our humanity. This is why the “manga” example is so important. There is no victim, no abuse, no wrong is done. And yet, men are going to prison. For looking at CARTOONS. This happens because of the kind of moralizing “thought police” thinking that I see here. It does not matter what a man DOES, only what we think might be going on his head.

No. The line between moral and immoral is clear and crucial. To intentionally blur it, as many are doing here, is to do a terrible wrong.

Amused
Amused
9 years ago

Arguments from nature invariably fail for three reasons:

(1) they are based on the assumption that nature is magical and has a mind and a plan;
(2) they emphasize certain aspects of nature while ignoring others; and
(3) to the extent that forming societies with rules, and for those societies and those rules to change is natural, the line between nature and culture gets exceeding blurry.

Take the idea that men are “naturally polygamous”. It’s premised on the notion that men propagate their genes by inseminating as many fertile women as possible. The problem is, this is not the only sensible reproductive strategy. After all, the evolutionary imperative isn’t just to shoot one’s load, but to ensure the survival of one’s offspring long enough for that offspring to be capable of reproduction. Sure, the upside of screwing everything that moves is that if you put your semen in lots and lots of women, statistically, odds are you’ll have some offspring who will themselves survive to reproduce. The downside is that children conceived this way have tremendously great odds of being aborted or dying young. In many ways, the better reproductive strategy for a male is to have children with one female or a limited number of females and to expend his energies on nurturing and protecting his offspring, so that they survive to successfully reproduce themselves. And that is precisely why humans — and we are not the only animals to function this way — are drawn to forming long-term, stable diads. Viewed from that angle, men can be characterized as naturally monogomous.

We encounter the same problem when MRA’s argue that rape is “natural”, and that men are evolutionarily driven to force themselves on attractive women. In fact, rape is a terrible evolutionary adaptation, because since prehistoric times, children conceived as a result of rape have had significantly increased odds of being aborted, killed at birth or not cared for adequately enough to ensure their own reproduction later on. And what do you know, extreme stress actually lowers a woman’s fertility. My grandmothers, who lived through World War II in Europe, told me that it was astoundingly common in war time for even young girls in their reproductive prime to just plain stop menstruating, even if they weren’t malnourished.

I think the most accurate way to consider the role of nature in all this is to acknowledge that human beings, like most other complex animals, are subject to complicated and potentially conflicting drives that sometimes pull us in different directions all at once. We’ve evolved to survive under vastly different circumstances — adaptability being THE most important evolutionary advantage — but that means that we can argue about what’s “natural” and what’s not till the cows come home. It’s important for us to pass on our genes, so we (both men and women) feel the pull of sex whenever we see another attractive member of the species. But it’s also important for us to ensure the survival of our genes in our offspring and their offspring, so we also have a strong pull towards cultivating and preserving committed relationships. We enjoy different and sometimes mutually exclusive things. The interplay between different reproductive imperatives is very complex, far more complex than simply saying that men are “naturally” polygamous, but women are “naturally” drawn to wrinkles and sagging flesh on one, and only one, billionaire.

Pecunium
9 years ago

Do the reverse. Imagine an 18 year old woman who (biologically) looks very YOUNG for her age. Imagine that she also acts, and dresses, like a 12 year old girl. Anyone looking at her would THINK she is 12. Now imagine a man who is strongly attracted to her BECAUSE of her pre-pubescent appearance. THIS is the man I am talking about. THIS is the man who I admire (assuming he does not act upon his desires).

She is old enough to consent.

No problem, no matter what she looks like.

I don’t have any philosophical problem with manga either.

I don’t have a problem with someone who looks at 14 year olds and gets turned on.

But that’s a far cry from people (like TAB, juandelacruz, NWO, etc.) who say the law needs to be changed because some people like children.

shesaidwut
shesaidwut
9 years ago

Um…no, AntZ, some feelings are unquestionably wrong. It is wrong to want to go out and beat people to death because of the color of their skin or their sexuality. It is wrong to want to rape every woman you see. It is wrong to think that mass genocides are necessary for any reason. There are a lot of feelings that are wrong.

Not acting on those feelings does not make them less wrong. A person does not get a pat on the head and a fucking cookie because they refrain from acting like a total monster.

theLaplaceDemon
theLaplaceDemon
9 years ago

“they value hot bodies and cute faces, which are indications of fertility and good DNA”

Go back to biology class, sweetheart.

Rutee Katreya
9 years ago

“As to this: How many of you could say, with honesty, that you would have the strength and courage to set asside your entire sexual nature, because the desire that you felt was morally wrong and/or illegal?”
So when did you start cheating on your wife again?

Seriously what the hell, you’re asking us if we can stop ourselves from having sex that’s morally wrong. Without qualification. That’s what it means.

“How many of you who mock and denigrate the heroic struggle of human beings who face the beast within themselves and WIN? I suspect that many of you, faced with the same awful choice, would embrace the evil within yourselves and victimize the young and/or helpless without remorse.”
So not only can you not defend your position, your best argument for it is a fictional tu quoque fallacy. That’s impressively bad.

Pecunium
9 years ago

RuteeL I think he’s asking for sympathy. He has drives, and he is suppressing them.

We should be grateful to him, instead we are saying that having these drive (which he striving to suppress) is wrong.

I’m sort of confused though… if they’re not wrong, why does he need to suppress them?

Joanna
9 years ago

“We encounter the same problem when MRA’s argue that rape is “natural”, and that men are evolutionarily driven to force themselves on attractive women. In fact, rape is a terrible evolutionary adaptation…”

The desire to rape is psychological and more to do with repressed anger than needing to “spread one’s seed” so to speak.

“3 clinical classifications of rape are proposed in which the aim of the rape is the differentiating factor: (a) aggressive, (b) sexual, and (c) sex-aggression diffusion. The aggressive rapists use sex as an expression of their anger to humiliate and defile the victim, who is always a stranger. They tend to have a long history of difficulty in heterosexual relationships, early sexual traumata involving an older woman (frequently the mother), body narcissism, and an absence of depth in their relationships. 3 cases are presented illustrating sexual traumata and their relationship to subsequent rape. The sexual rapists use minimal violence and no brutality in their attacks. They are generally defending against homosexual feelings, attempting to escape the passive-feminine resolution, and denying feelings of impotency. 2 examples of this type of rapist are described. The sadistic rapist is unable to experience sexual excitement without violence. A case is described indicating the paranoia, sexualization of aggression, and violent histories of such men.”

Captain Bathrobe
Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

On the subject of the Titanic, MRA historians now have indisputable evidence that it was not an iceberg that did the good ship in, but rather a solid block of congealed feminism, planted by suffragist agents in the pay of Woodrow Wilson’s wife. This goes deeper than we ever suspected…

Captain Bathrobe
Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

Maybe I’m just a big, hairy mangina, but the way I think about a women affects whether I am attracted to her. There have been many times when my feelings of attraction for a beautiful woman have taken a nosedive after she opened her mouth and said something stupid (like quoting Rush Limbaugh). Similarly, wit and intelligence in a woman have the effect of increasing my feelings of attraction. By the same token, when I find out that an otherwise attractive young woman is really a girl of 14, my feelings of attraction largely diminish. The very idea squicks me out, and that’s not sexy.

shaenon
9 years ago

Now, since I’m so relieved I’m not married to you, I’m going to go give my husband a hug and a kiss. Because I hate men so very, very much. All men. Even my husband. Who I have sex with. Who I’ve been with for four years. Wow, man, your logic is breaking down pretty fiercely now, isn’t it?

You guys have no idea how hard I hug my husband after reading threads like these.

Quick pro tip for the group: when someone starts making up evo-psych explanations for why certain physical features are attractive, especially if they use phrases like “signs of fertility” or “signs of health,” you can trust you’re dealing with someone with no understanding of genetics. The idea that attractiveness always serves a practical purpose, like signifying fertility or health, was debunked years ago. Attractive features are evolutionarily useful because they attract. That’s their purpose.

For instance, evolutionary biologists used to think that male peacocks grew those big tails as a sign of good health: if they could afford to expend calories building big tails, they must be stronger, healthier, and more fertile than the competition, right? Then they actually checked and discovered that the peacocks with big tails were less healthy than the ones with smaller tails. Peacocks sacrifice overall fitness to grow big tails. For whatever reason, peahens like the big tails, so big tails help a peacock pass on his genes. And that’s good for the peahens who mate with the big-tailed guys, because it makes them likely to produce male offspring who will get laid.

In other words, attractiveness isn’t a sign of other desirable genetic traits; the attractiveness itself is the desirable trait.

Yeah, I graduated summa cum laude too. And this one time, I totally slept through a class, but I hella aced it anyway. And my IQ is in the 99th percentile and I was the brains on every project I worked on because everyone around me is so dumb and hey, come back, I haven’t told you how witty and charming I am yet!

Hee.

Bagelsan
Bagelsan
9 years ago

Yeah, I graduated summa cum laude too. And this one time, I totally slept through a class, but I hella aced it anyway. And my IQ is in the 99th percentile and I was the brains on every project I worked on because everyone around me is so dumb and hey, come back, I haven’t told you how witty and charming I am yet!

Hee.

Forget all the knowledgeable and well-argued crap in the rest of your comment; this shit is convincing! Can I have all your babies? I can tell you have DNAs like whoa!

I dunno about my IQ, but my SATs were in the 99th percentile! We should have so much sex and stuff right now, and then our kids can be in the 9999th percentile!! OMG I’m turned on just thinking about how hungover and sleepy they can be in class!!!