Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

shadowfyr · 09-26-2007, 11:31 PM

This is actually a *huge* mess in the US. Depending on state, the age of consent can be anything from 13 (Hawaii) to 19, if you are a) the wrong gender and b) with the same sex. It all depends on if you are being prosecuted (persecuted?) by the individual state you live in, the state you made the mistake of entering before doing it, or some federal government ape, since the feds I think have the 18 year rule, which they can opt to impose, *if* they deem its suddenly a federal case, instead of a state one. How they determine that is a tad vague, and may depend on if state lines where crossed or not, but not always, since you could, I presume, also get nailed if they caught you at it while in the middle of a different case that also has federal involvement. Its quite mad, irrational, arbitrary and stupid, given that less than two hundred years ago 13 was OK for everyplace and people used to live in single room houses, and even share beds with the kids, there being no way for the average person to afford extra rooms. Go back farther and its wasn't uncommon practice for a couple to share the bed of one of their parents, there being no other place to sleep, not just due to the size of the residence, but also because grandma, every brother and sister, and half your cousins lived in the same building.

We have gone from the extreme of not questioning if harm could be caused, to presuming that we can arbitrarily define when the line can be drawn at when harm can happen, then backfill the holes with lots of hypothesis, paranoia and baseless assertions of what constitutes harm, how you can tell, and what the result will be. Just look at what happened with child molestation cases where they questioned the children using dolls. Turns out, for 90% of them, at the ages being interviewed, they don't *yet* have the capacity to extrapolate from themselves to something "symbolic" of them. In other words, ask them if someone did X, Y or Z to the doll, and they will play what they think is a game, with no clue that the doll is supposed to actually represent them in some tangible fashion.

We have lots of people asking "when" the age is that sex or other such things won't harm someone, and lots of people giving made up answers. No one is asking, "What are the psychological frameworks or developmental capacities that *must* exist in someone, before the conduct produces positive outcomes, instead of negative. Or, in other words, not, "What arbitrary point do we *assume* they can handle it?", but, "What characteristics does someone have that *can* handle it?" See, drawing an imaginary line means you don't have to ask the later question. Its hard to answer, and even if you had an answer, it would be different for **every single person you examined**. And, the last thing anyone wants a school, hospital, psychologist, etc. to tell *them* when *their* kids are ready for something that most parents would just as soon didn't happen until their kid was 30.

09-26-2007, 11:31 PM	#78
shadowfyr Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 310	Re: Sex & Violence This is actually a huge mess in the US. Depending on state, the age of consent can be anything from 13 (Hawaii) to 19, if you are a) the wrong gender and b) with the same sex. It all depends on if you are being prosecuted (persecuted?) by the individual state you live in, the state you made the mistake of entering before doing it, or some federal government ape, since the feds I think have the 18 year rule, which they can opt to impose, if they deem its suddenly a federal case, instead of a state one. How they determine that is a tad vague, and may depend on if state lines where crossed or not, but not always, since you could, I presume, also get nailed if they caught you at it while in the middle of a different case that also has federal involvement. Its quite mad, irrational, arbitrary and stupid, given that less than two hundred years ago 13 was OK for everyplace and people used to live in single room houses, and even share beds with the kids, there being no way for the average person to afford extra rooms. Go back farther and its wasn't uncommon practice for a couple to share the bed of one of their parents, there being no other place to sleep, not just due to the size of the residence, but also because grandma, every brother and sister, and half your cousins lived in the same building. We have gone from the extreme of not questioning if harm could be caused, to presuming that we can arbitrarily define when the line can be drawn at when harm can happen, then backfill the holes with lots of hypothesis, paranoia and baseless assertions of what constitutes harm, how you can tell, and what the result will be. Just look at what happened with child molestation cases where they questioned the children using dolls. Turns out, for 90% of them, at the ages being interviewed, they don't yet have the capacity to extrapolate from themselves to something "symbolic" of them. In other words, ask them if someone did X, Y or Z to the doll, and they will play what they think is a game, with no clue that the doll is supposed to actually represent them in some tangible fashion. We have lots of people asking "when" the age is that sex or other such things won't harm someone, and lots of people giving made up answers. No one is asking, "What are the psychological frameworks or developmental capacities that must exist in someone, before the conduct produces positive outcomes, instead of negative. Or, in other words, not, "What arbitrary point do we assume they can handle it?", but, "What characteristics does someone have that can handle it?" See, drawing an imaginary line means you don't have to ask the later question. Its hard to answer, and even if you had an answer, it would be different for every single person you examined. And, the last thing anyone wants a school, hospital, psychologist, etc. to tell them when their kids are ready for something that most parents would just as soon didn't happen until their kid was 30.