Halx

Detach your mind for a moment from any predefined notions of sexuality in children that you may have. Conceptualize with me this trend: In a sexually restricted society, we must have two classes of sexual extremes - the innocent and the perverted. In the past, the innocent ones have been defined as women and the perverted ones were those who refused to deny that women were capable of sexual inclinations. Now that we've learned that women are indeed sexual beings, the innocent label is now firmly fixed upon the children of the world. We've evolved, right?

The torch bearers of sexual perversion have moved from men in general, to homosexuals, to sadomasochists, and now to pedophiles. Society keeps finding a way to nail down a definable group of people who are the utmost scum when it comes to human morality. Ask most anyone today and they will tell you that pedophiles are the WORST of all sexual perverts.

As the above evolution has taken place, we have continuously cut out sections of society that we eventually come around to accepting. As less and less people are considered part of the innocent subsection, the selection of the perverts who are out to get them also shrinks. We have, currently, a very tidy definition of what is innocent and what is perverted. A child is innocent and lacks the ability to be sexual, right? All who would dare to insinuate otherwise or even go so far as to explore this boundary are the utmost of perverts and are the muck of society.

Given the trend of stripping away sexual boundaries toward total sexual awareness, how hard will the people grasp on to the little remaining idealized purity in the world? How long until sexuality is realized within children? Is there any more frontier to protect against the sexual predators whose perversion is to-be-named?

The real question I want to ask in all of this is, "Why so sacred?" If you can recognize the trend that I have just described, will you still hold tight to this holy purity that we have bestowed upon children? Or does what I've just said put it into perspective? Are you more willing to accept that children can be sexual? After knowing that women once were seen to be so pure that any sexual tendencies or reactions were medical defects? This antiquated view of women is the same lens we view children with today. Considering this, can you be so sure of yourself?

My goal is to cast doubt and to inspire questions. My fear is that one may only read the question without reading the context, thus believing that I am advocating or pardoning something. In order to know ourselves, we must be able to ask questions. This is what philosophy is for, is it not? Otherwise, the only good study is the study that confirms what we already think. How dreary.

__________________
- Hal(x)
"But suppose everybody on our side felt that way."
"Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way. Wouldn't I?"
[Read Me]

Charlatan

It all comes down to consent. A young child, say five-years-old, cannot give consent to the sexual act.

All of the other acts you have mentioned are act, typically, between two consenting adults. Like a rapist, paedophile does not have this consent.

__________________
“I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization.” - Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes

Willravel

There are emotional and intellectual levels necessary for what we consider consent. These levels are not often found in people under a certain age, becoming less frequent as the child is younger. For the sake of not allowing sex without consent, an age was decided upon, which in many places including the US is 18. As someone with a background in psychology, someone who learned about the development of children, I will say the following:

Everyone develops at a different speed, and everyone is different. It's important for children to explore their sexuality responsibly as they turn into adults. I am totally in support of safe and responsible experimentation. It is also important, though, that adults do not take advantage of the emerging curiosities in children who do not have the knowledge, experience, and maturity to make their own decisions concerning sex.

__________________
ɯǝɥʇ ǝʌlos uɐɔ ǝʍ ʇɐɥʇ ǝɔuɐɹouƃı ɥƃnoɹɥʇ ʇou sı ʇı 'sɯǝlqoɹd ǝʇɐǝɹɔ uɐɔ ǝƃpǝlʍouʞ ɟı

Halx

Do we have to start questioning the concept of consent in order to start focusing on the topic at hand?

Not even considering sex acts; artistic pictures of nude children that insinuate sexuality are also right out.

__________________
- Hal(x)
"But suppose everybody on our side felt that way."
"Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way. Wouldn't I?"
[Read Me]

kramus

I think that societies evolve and devolve their morality over long periods of time. Currently children in the West are considered the Innocent. Consider the Romans during their Empire. Caligula had sex with animals in the Coloseum in front of the population of Rome. The Emperor Tiberius had specially trained young (5, 6 year old) boys who would swim underwater in his pleasure pools and nibble on his cock. The more refined brothels during the Renaissance had available children of either gender, prepubescent girls and castrated boys. The "pure" in those days were people who had dedicated themselves to service to God. If you nailed a nun, got under the frock of a monk, or scored yourself a Vestal Virgin you were a pervert. That being said, there were Popes who made their bastard children officials of the church, which means there was wide-spread awareness of the baser nature of people.
I don't know what the next "Innocent" group will be. Perhaps it will be the mentally deficient, the mad or the physically incapacitated. Some of these are already on the edge of acceptability, and there are some laws about having sex with people who are incapable of making decisions for themselves. Time will tell.

__________________
And now to disengage the clutch of the forebrain ...
browse through my web-space - the link is in my profile under "Biography"

Willravel

Well that's the thing: whenever you discuss children and sex, consent is right there banging your door down. Whether it's actually having sex with the kid or just taking pictures... there's consent. Without the mental and emotional faculties to give consent, there is none. That's usually where the conversation either ends, or it goes into rape which is something I doubt society is willing to get used to a la homosexuals and sados. In each of those particular scenarios, consent is there.

__________________
ɯǝɥʇ ǝʌlos uɐɔ ǝʍ ʇɐɥʇ ǝɔuɐɹouƃı ɥƃnoɹɥʇ ʇou sı ʇı 'sɯǝlqoɹd ǝʇɐǝɹɔ uɐɔ ǝƃpǝlʍouʞ ɟı

abaya

I can only speak for myself... I was more sexual at age 8 than I was from age 14 to 22. I think it was the only time in my life when I truly explored myself and others fearlessly, in a sexual way (but also harmless--we were all peers, and no one was exerting power over others). I wish I could have that kind of openness now.

Now, if I became a mother and knew that my 8 year old daughter was doing what I did? It would disturb me at some level, I don't know why. I don't necessarily need to believe that kids are innocent, but I don't want to KNOW that they are doing non-innocent things, you know? (My family had 2 acres of land--we had lots of places to hide and experiment.) But I was very lucky in that no one ever abused me... if they had, I would have a very different take on this story.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

roachboy

seems to me that you have a number of different questions crunched into each other hal.

speaking like the tiresome historian that i sometimes can be...

a) the cultural construction of children--so the image of them--particular to, say, the states (particular to particular social classes within the states)--what it is, where is came from, why it is.

this ideal-child thing is pretty recent. it probably comes about along with the rise of the bourgeoisie (middle class in the states and uk--not quite the same) across the 19th century---differentially in different contexts (with the british and americans probably leading the way, as they seem all to willing to do in matters that involve running away from sexuality)---the bourgeoisie/middle class was (still is, really) kinda obsessed with distancing itself from what was around it spatially, culturally/intellectually, etc. so it's probably linked to the construction of the notion of the private sphere, private life--publicness/openness about sex/sexuality was something imputed to the poor/working class, and so at some level the enclosure of sex within the private sphere, and the separation of children from sexuality is a function of broader processes of class differentiation.

these sorts of things are gradual, so it's not like one fine day in 1853 everything changed.

there's a good history of this in philippe ariès "history of childhood" if you're interested...

b) notions concerning sexual activity in/amongst children---it seems historically a subset of the above--and it's also very specifically a euro-american thing. folk like to think that the fact that it is euro-americans who are horrified by this is an index of their moral superiority, but another way of seeing it is as an index of just how strange and particular this euro-american "morality" is.

anyway, this too is a historical process, another gradual one, linked to the above but not exactly identical with it. if you're interested, you probably could treat the development of those strange doll-like outfits that turn up in 19th century photographs as an index.

c) the development of the notion of pedaophilia is separate, it seems to me.
this i know less about, but i suspect it's more recent still than the other two. it seems pretty clear that the hysteria about the idea of it is real recent, an aspect of this curious floating paranoia that i, for whatever reason, link to shows like "america's most wanted" and those milk cartons with pictures of kidnapped kids on them---they're not only about the acts themselves, but also about a sense of being-threatened, being-under-seige. it's been a pretty useful paranoia for conservatives, frankly.

d) the linkage of pedophilia to rape around the notion of consent seems to me a legal thing, but i know almost nothing about how it came about.

o yeah--the general argument in the op reminds me somehow of jg ballard's argument in one of his more recent novels that goes something like "in a society characterizes by a smothering love and acceptance, fascism is the last pornography..."

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

mixedmedia

I don't know that pedophilia will ever gain acceptance like other forms of sexuality that occur between adults. If anything, rather than moving towards an acceptance of it, we are moving further and further away from it. As has been noted already, there have been times when engaging children in sexual activity was not necessarily taboo.

I think pedophilia, as opposed to homosexuality and sadomasochism, is taking a route (in our Western psyche at least) as did that of slavery and, consequently, child labor - ie, authoritarian domination over those who do not have a choice is bad. In the case of children that domination being either perceived or literal.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus

ratbastid

All social constructions are constructions. Other societies, separated from us whether by space or by time, construct things differently. But that doesn't mean we don't have to deal with the society we're IN. However enlightened any of us might be, we're still a product of our culture, and nobody of ANY place or time can escape that.

Infinite_Loser

Remember, you can't help the way you feel

__________________
I believe in equality; Everyone is equally inferior to me.

ring

The book, Care of The Soul, By Thomas Moore, has an interesting chapter
dealing with the subject of perversion, he talks about peoples different attitudes towards it, we all have different lines in our heads that we draw.

It has been some time since I have read it, my mother is borrowing it now.
When considering to treat Pedophilia as something that even needs to be treated, where is the compassion involved, if one is reviled by the nature of the act?

Wish I could remember more.

I was extremely sexual at a young age,
My sister even made up an interesting term of her own for masturbation,

She called it 'Gassasodum', what we used to do to our pillows as children.

__________________
You're never going to catch me,
because I'm not running away. - ring

Ustwo

In homosexual struggles for equality, now and then someone would say something like 'If we allow this, whats next, pedophilia?' and these people would be soundly beaten down. I think rightly so.

But then apparently, we are on such a slippery slope after all.

Because some pre-pubecent girls rub their vagina's on pillows because it feels good doesn't really make them sexual beings. They are infertile, without the proper hormones, and don't respond the same to sexual stimuli. It feels good when someone scratches your back too, and thats not inherently sexual.

Some may come into their sexuality earlier than others, but it is impossible to decide who is 'ready' on a case by case basis so much like drinking ages, voting ages, and driving ages, so is the 'sexual age' determined.

This isn't about perversion, its about being wrong, about men (by vast majority) using children to sate their adult lust on a defenseless person.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

ring

I agree with your point about defenseless children, yet I am in disagreement,
or rather confused about your statement regarding fertility, hormones
being the defining factor of sexuality.

Your definition, or contrast perhaps, of perversion and being 'Wrong' is something I would like to understand better.

__________________
You're never going to catch me,
because I'm not running away. - ring

ironman

I love the idea of questioning every aspect of human conduct and the reasons why we create laws and norms, it's the only way to evolve and grow as a race I firmly believe. With that in mind, and seeing how many people has raised the consent issue, a few years ago, Chilean writer Isabel Allende in an interview confessed that she willfully seduced an adult fisherman when she was only 4 or 5 years old, she freely and willfully consented as many other kids do on a daily basis with other minors or even adults. As I mentioned it in another thread about a father and daughter that had married each other, social uses and rules depend greatly on the times that are been lived and I believe this is not different with kids, I mean, we have no problem judging minors as adults for the gravity of their crimes, but when it comes to sex we can't accept that a kid can consent? It seems kind of contradictory to me.

__________________
If I agreed with you we´d both be wrong

ring

^^^^ yup^^^^^

I will bow out now.

__________________
You're never going to catch me,
because I'm not running away. - ring

Halx

ironman, that's a great observation. Through all of this, I see the same point blank reaction: kids can't consent. Well, that was the same idea they had a few hundred years ago when they said women had no sexual drive. It's a little far out to propose that kids can consent, but I don't think its too much to ask people to consider that IF a child is informed at an early age about sex, they will in turn be able to consent or decline. Then where does the morality lie?

__________________
- Hal(x)
"But suppose everybody on our side felt that way."
"Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way. Wouldn't I?"
[Read Me]

Ustwo

Seduced at age 4 or 5 eh? Ummm I'm going to call shenanigans on that. I confess that at age 4 I could fly and met Jesus. Go talk to some 4 year olds for a bit and see what you think.

In a crime the child is causing harm to others and if tried as an adult it would be they knew they were causing harm to others. Sex on the other hand is normally done unto them by adults. They are the victims in that case even if willing as they don't have a clue what they are consenting to do.

Kids can't sign contracts before they are 18 either. The reason being that kids, even smart ones, are idiots.

I could teach my daughter all about sex, and have her consent to give me a blow job, after all who is going to say no to daddy at say age 7.

Woopy do, she will also believe in Santa Claus too.

The morality is you are taking advantage of someone who doesn't even really understand the ramifications of their actions at a stage in their life where pleasing and trusting adults is part of their very make up.

What makes someone sexual? Is it their genitals? No, its their hormones and then how they affect those genitals.

For annoying example. My wife is breast feeding, this in most women changes her hormone levels and turns off her sex drive. She has absolutely no desire for sex or sexual pleasure, because her hormones are saying 'not now'. Once she stops, her hormones will change back and she will be the horny wife again.

Sex is chemical not mystical, without the right chemicals you are not sexual any more than a car is a vehicle without gasoline.

I'd also add in children the sex hormones change the genitals as well, so what you have in a child is immature genitals without sex hormones. If anything this should be the definition of a child.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Halx

So, what if I concede that maybe a 7 year old may not be able to look out for themselves, would your statement hold true for someone who is 11?

__________________
- Hal(x)
"But suppose everybody on our side felt that way."
"Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way. Wouldn't I?"
[Read Me]

mixedmedia

I know that children can consent. I was very sexual as a child, as well.

I think the real question is the ability for a child to cope with the intense emotional responsibility of a sexual relationship. How does an 8 year old (or even an 11 year old) negotiate a relationship with an adult? Coping with the possibilities of pregnancy, disease? Let alone the psychological affliction of heartbreak.

Or are we only considering the sexuality of children as a sexual novelty for adults to get off on?

Also, I don't recall a time, other than during the Victorian era in the West perhaps, where it was considered that women were not sexual creatures.

I think for these reasons it is not likely that modern society will be evolving towards one with total sexual freedom among children and adults. And the concept of consent, when it comes to children, cannot easily be subtracted from the equation. Children do not always clearly understand when they have a choice...especially when they are dealing with adults.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus

Ustwo

Yes, for the vast majority, for 13 somewhat less, for 16 even less, for 18 it would only hold for a few who are late in mental development.

Anything based on a birthday is arbitrary. In my work I think of 'normal' growth as about +- 4 years. I've seen 12 year olds who looked like they were 16 and 12 year olds who looked (and acted) 7. So a birthday will not be equal to all but its the best we can do.

Since we can't realistically test each child for their mental state in terms of sexual consent and maturity we err on the side of caution. 18 is most likely a bit on the over cautious side but I support it because it does over all protect them at a time where most may be sexually mature but are still dumb asses when it comes to decision making and maturity.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

roachboy

the other rb is right of course. i'm a little surprised that it required being said, but such is the nature of the topic i guess.
anyway, i wasn't heading in the direction of the main characters in "rope."


i was considering talking about freud in this context but decided against it earlier.

the link is obvious---"the three essays on sexuality" are interesting, the description of the process of differentiation of drives from a global kind of pleasure/pain dynamic and the accompanying , that of mapping....
there is a question of at what point the drives that freud talks about as being sexual become separated and mapped in such a way as to be functionally sexual in the sense an adult would understand the term.

then there is the question of the intertwining of fantasy and memory, which the story from isabelle allende raised, which (like it or not) psychoanalysis raised in spades as well.

then there is a more uncomfortable question of the extent to which the norms that de facto define away questions of childhood sexuality (as a consequence, if you take the norms as generating an image of children through what they prohibit) and the taboos that accumulate around their violation to some extent create the charge behind the act of pedophilia...because it seems to me that hysterical denial has the paradoxical effect of generating an attraction around what is prohibited in that way, because it is prohibited in that way.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

mixedmedia

I understand that there is hysteria surrounding this subject. Yet, my own kids were molested and I don't surround it with catastrophic emotions about the theft of their innocence. It's not that I fail to be cognizant of that to an extent, it is something I regret, no doubt. But, most of my bristly emotions come from the sense of my children being betrayed and exploited by someone they trusted.

So maybe I am not the most appropriate person to be commenting on this subject, lol.

But the bug in my ear in this discussion revolves around that theme of betrayal and exploitation. Pedophilia is a sexual obsession held by adults, not often associated with the concept of romantic love (although sometimes it is, to be sure). Most often pedophilia is a desire to have sex with children and nothing more. Therefore, if it were to become acceptable then what we would be accepting is the common perception of children as sex objects to be exploited by adults, not as sexual equals in mature relationships. Which is why you can't really compare it to the acceptance of female sexual desire, homosexuality or s&m, in my opinion.

I'm writing this fast, hope it makes sense.

Also, just on another personal note, I embarked on a sexual relati