Sexual discrimination of older people

    • Re: Sexual discrimination of older people

      Xololo wrote:






      So it means, according to your view, children (under 18) ARE considered neurologically developed enough to be able to make an informed decision to consent to sex with a child (under 18) BECAUSE they are allowed to have sex and are not criminalized in the real.:rofl::rofl:

      Because if this is not true according to your logic, all the teenagers who live sexual life, must be criminals and pedophiles. :rofl::rofl:

      IMO children should not be having sex, period, and the vast majority of children are not neurologically developed enough to make an informed decision to consent to sex with anyone. However, when it comes to what is legal and what is not, my opinion doesn't matter, nor does yours. What's law is law.

      It's more or less common knowledge in the medical community that the majority of children do not have the ability to weigh the ramifications of their actions, especially those which will impact others more than themselves. The part of the brain that provides this thinking ability is not considered fully developed until about the early 20s. Because of this, it's generally accepted that "kids will be kids" and do stupid shit, so there's no sense ruining a child's life because a lack of ability to realize the ramifications of something. There are exceptions to this rule of course, (cases of rape or murder for example) but as a mentally competent adult, you DO have the ability to weigh the ramifications of a decision, which is why in an adult/child sexual relationship, the adult will be the one prosecuted, not the child.
      June 26 2010<3

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Shonna ().

    • Re: Sexual discrimination of older people

      Yes you said that because you said the manipulation as the ARGUMENT. So it is automatically the same what I said.

      Teens are false enough to manipulate like adults do. So no difference. If you do not thinks so, you do not know about the life anything. So, do not say the manipulation as the ARGUMENT.

      Dark Sojourn wrote:



      I was refering to teens who are still maturing and really are generally not ready for it yet. Doing it with someone simply 20 years younger than you is a lot different from being with someone who is still in their teen years. Most people are fully developed both mentally and physically by the time they are over 20, so age difference becomes less important with relantionships concerning people only of 20+ years of age.


      The result is always the same no matter what age they are or how much they are developed both mentally and physically = the result is having sex. (Nothing other the topic is about.)

      Yes, doing it with someone simply 20 years older is a lot different from being with someone who is still in their teen years:
      Older males (for example 50) are more RESPONSIBLE than 15 year old males, because 50 (for example) usually use condoms unlike 15 year old males who are not so RESPONSIBLE. So, 15 year old male is more dangerous for a teen girl than 50 year old male. In spite of this fact, 15 year old males are allowed to have sex with a teen girl. The hypocritically habit prefers the dangerous 15 year old male for teen girl. That's why 15 is allowed to have a beauty but 50 is not allowed to have a beauty.

      The post was edited 4 times, last by Xololo ().

    • Re: Sexual discrimination of older people

      Shonna wrote:

      IMO children should not be having sex, period, and the vast majority of children are not neurologically developed enough to make an informed decision to consent to sex with anyone.


      :rofl::rofl::rofl:

      We are talking about "children" of age 17-15. Maybe someone will write here a figure (percentage), how many people live a sexual life since the age of 14, 15, 16, 17. The statistic is very welcome!

      And do not talk about the majority. Because, for the reason of the majority, you cannot ban the minority having sex. That's would be discrimination for the minority of teenagers.

      I do NOT talk about what YOU want but I am talking about the real life. About the reality.

      By the way, the fact you said the people 17-15 should not be having sex, is stupid view. Because the nature says, big percentage of people of age 17-15 live sexual life. You cannot ban the nature. What they should not have is to be prevented from the education about safe sex. People 17-15 are usually prevented from the education about safe sex, by people who say they should not be having sex. Such people are the real danger for teenagers. Not the fact they have safe sex.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Xololo ().

    • Re: Sexual discrimination of older people

      Jordioa18 wrote:

      Godverdomme! Wat kutzooi is dit!

      Ignorance is temporarily, but you're clearly stupid and narrow-minded, and stupidity stays forever...
      Xololo, go fuck yourself and don't mind going on TH


      Yes! That's exact about you::rofl:

      Godverdomme! Wat kutzooi is dit!

      Ignorance is temporarily, but you're clearly stupid and narrow-minded, and stupidity stays forever...
      Jordioa18, go fuck yourself and don't mind going on TH

      P.S. I am worried, in your case, ignorance will be permanent. :rofl:

    • Re: Sexual discrimination of older people

      Xololo wrote:

      Yes! That's exact about you::rofl:

      Godverdomme! Wat kutzooi is dit!

      Ignorance is temporarily, but you're clearly stupid and narrow-minded, and stupidity stays forever...
      Jordioa18, go fuck yourself and don't mind going on TH

      P.S. I am worried, in your case, ignorance will be permanent. :rofl:

      Your opinion is irrelevant. And you copy pasted what I thped, replacing your name with mine. That's fucking sad
      Opgekankert, jij!

      Sometimes, you gotta put them deuces up.