Members with Skinny People Avatars

Off Topic
61

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Westclock wrote:
You do realize that Han Solo and Indiana Jones and Quinn Harris are fictional characters. And by definition are infact not “real men”.

Of course I realize that they are fictional characters. They are fictional characters who, just like Achilles, Sir Galahad and (I will not say “Jesus,” I will not say “Jesus…”) Aragorn, are held up as exemplars of heroism and manliness.

Also age difference is another thing, going after pre-pubescent girls at any age is demented.

Wait, I thought we were talking about 17-year-old girls. 17-year-old girls are, “by definition” not pre-pubescent, inasmuch as the onset of puberty generally occurs in the early teens.

My highschool example does apply to all situations, for example, while it is a little creepy for a 50-60 year old to fuck a 19 year old, its still acceptable even though she was not even a fetus when he graduated from highschool.

I’m curious, Westclock. At what age do you figure that it becomes “a little creepy” for a man to have sex with a 19-year old woman? Certainly not 20. Nor 30, I would imagine.

40? 35? Do I hear 37 and a half?

Atleast shes fully grown and fully developed, by definition a woman.

Ah, now there’s the rub. By what definition? Because you must know that there is no consensus on the matter.

At what age does a girl become a woman? Biologically speaking, it’s at whatever age she has her first period. At that time, she is, “by definition,” of breeding age. This is generally age 13, although in the inner cities (thanks in large part to hormones in hamburgers), it’s not uncommon for girls to experience menarche at the age of 8.

Legally speaking? Well, that’s tricky, because first of all, are we talking age of majority, or age of consent? If it’s age of majority, are we talking about full majority, which is 21 in the United States (although it’s 20 in Japan, and 18 in most other countries)? Or just “old enough to vote?”

If we’re talking age of consent, then you must know that it varies widely from state to state. It is legal to have sex with a 16-year-old girl in 31 states and the District of Columbia, and legal to have sex with a 17-year-old in 39 states and DC.

I won’t get into the law outside of the US, but it gets to be pretty young. Like 16 in the UK, 15 in France and Sweden, 14 in Austria, Germany, and Bulgaria, and 12 in the Vatican City. No altar boy jokes, please. (a US citizen abroad, by the way, is legally permitted to have sex with a 16-year-old girl, but no younger than 16, even if local laws permit it).

It can be said that European girls are more emotionally mature at fourteen than most American girls are at seventeen, nineteen, or twenty-three, but if emotional maturity were the benchmark for determining readiness for sexual activity, than the age of consent in the United States would be thirty-five.

Theres a difference between fucking a younger woman and fucking a child, no matter how old you are.

And once again, a seventeen-year-old is NOT physically, legally (in most jurisdictions), nor emotionally (in most cultures) a child. By definition.[/quote]

yah… let’s not get into other cultures especially as one country just upheld the marriage of an 8yr old to a 47 year old man.

let’s not use other nations as an example

and just because some things are legal doesn’t mean they are right. It used to be legal to do a lot of things that were wrong.

I get the 16yr old thing, it’s a pervy thing but understandable.

but don’t get on all worked up as if it to be held in high regard

62

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

oh you know things are wrong if SickAbs likes and agrees with your post…
[/quote]

If a person cared too much about who agrees with his opinions and ideas, he would soon stop having them.

63

taunt

64

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
yah… let’s not get into other cultures especially as one country just upheld the marriage of an 8yr old to a 47 year old man.[/quote]

I know. I’m the one who started the thread on PWI condemning it.

I’m not. Hence, “I won’t get into the law outside of the US.”

Quite true. The law once said that it was wrong for a man to have anal sex with his own wife. We all know how mistaken that law is.

However, one must demonstrate why it is “wrong” to have sex with a 16-year old, if the law says that it’s permissible. The only answer I would accept (having rejected the arguments that she hasn’t yet matured physically (yes, she has), legally (yes, she has, with provisos), or emotionally (…uh, no, probably not, but how many women ever do in this culture?) is if a person who was much more advance than her in age, income, political or social power, etc. exerted his coercive powers on her, making her bend to his will and provide sex to him.

But in this case, I’d say that it would be just as “wrong” if she were 16, 26, or 36. In other words, her age is irrelevant.

Do you think it’s just as pervy for a 35-year-old woman to sleep with a 16-year-old stud?

Who’s getting worked up? I’m just making conversation.
[/quote]

65

[quote]Mr.Purple wrote:
A guy in his early twenties looking at 16 year old girls? That’s called nature, not pedophilia.
[/quote]

Actually, nature would be looking at fully developed females. Their prime is supposed to be 18-30 or something.

66

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Of course I realize that they are fictional characters. They are fictional characters who, just like … Aragorn…[/quote]

OK.

You’re a dead man.

67

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
Of course I realize that they are fictional characters. They are fictional characters who, just like … Aragorn…

OK.

You’re a dead man.[/quote]

It was a tough call. Alienate the Christians, or the die-hard Lord of the Rings fans. Guess I should have said “Horus,” but then I’d have the Zoroastrians on my ass.

Messianic demigods with beards. There are just too many of them.

68

How about avatars of fat guys?

69

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
yah… let’s not get into other cultures especially as one country just upheld the marriage of an 8yr old to a 47 year old man.

I know. I’m the one who started the thread on PWI condemning it.

let’s not use other nations as an example

I’m not. Hence, “I won’t get into the law outside of the US.”

and just because some things are legal doesn’t mean they are right. It used to be legal to do a lot of things that were wrong.

Quite true. The law once said that it was wrong for a man to have anal sex with his own wife. We all know how mistaken that law is.

However, one must demonstrate why it is “wrong” to have sex with a 16-year old, if the law says that it’s permissible. The only answer I would accept (having rejected the arguments that she hasn’t yet matured physically (yes, she has), legally (yes, she has, with provisos), or emotionally (…uh, no, probably not, but how many women ever do in this culture?) is if a person who was much more advance than her in age, income, political or social power, etc. exerted his coercive powers on her, making her bend to his will and provide sex to him.

But in this case, I’d say that it would be just as “wrong” if she were 16, 26, or 36. In other words, her age is irrelevant.

I get the 16yr old thing, it’s a pervy thing but understandable.

Do you think it’s just as pervy for a 35-year-old woman to sleep with a 16-year-old stud?

but don’t get on all worked up as if it to be held in high regard

Who’s getting worked up? I’m just making conversation.

[/quote]

I didn’t know there was a thread about that in PWI

I am not attracted to 16yr old boys so yah, I would think that would be pervy.

and did you just say women don’t ever mature emotionally?

I do support Romeo and Juliet laws, I am not a fan of 36yr old men dating 16yr old girls.

70

This thread just got serious.

Varqanir vs the World. And he’s winning.

71

[quote]WolBarret wrote:
This thread just got serious.

Varqanir vs the World. And he’s winning.[/quote]

ah well if you’ve called it then everyone should retire the field, you would be the last word

72

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
WolBarret wrote:
This thread just got serious.

Varqanir vs the World. And he’s winning.

ah well if you’ve called it then everyone should retire the field, you would be the last word
[/quote]

Not at all. Keep going. This is one of the few debates that haven’t resorted to name calling. Both sides are using logic and being respectful.

73

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

I didn’t know there was a thread about that in PWI[/quote]

There sure was.[quote]

I am not attracted to 16yr old boys so yah, I would think that would be pervy.[/quote]

Fair enough. But surely you understand the problem in extrapolating “nobody should ever do it because it’s wrong” from “I don’t like it because I think it’s icky.”

No, I did not. I asked rhetorically how many women ever mature emotionally in this culture, and before that I implied that most people in this country attain emotional maturity at about the age of 35.

I do support Romeo and Juliet laws, I am not a fan of 36yr old men dating 16yr old girls.
[/quote]

Well, if it makes you feel any better, the youngest girl I ever dated was 18, and I was 23 at the time. Then again, I also dated a 41-year-old woman when I was 20, which probably creeps you out.

74

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:

I am not attracted to 16yr old boys so yah, I would think that would be pervy.

Fair enough. But surely you understand the problem in extrapolating “nobody should ever do it because it’s wrong” from “I don’t like it because I think it’s icky.” [/quote]

But you are assuming that is why I think there should be safeguards on minors. We don’t let minors enter into contracts either.

[quote]and did you just say women don’t ever mature emotionally?

No, I did not. I asked rhetorically how many women ever mature emotionally in this culture, and before that I implied that most people in this country attain emotional maturity at about the age of 35.[/quote]

well that is a subjective evaluation so I won’t argue with your perception of things, or the people you tend to encounter. I don’t agree with you, but it just means we know different types of people and have had different experiences.

[quote]I do support Romeo and Juliet laws, I am not a fan of 36yr old men dating 16yr old girls.

Well, if it makes you feel any better, the youngest girl I ever dated was 18, and I was 23 at the time. Then again, I also dated a 41-year-old woman when I was 20, which probably creeps you out.[/quote]

why? you were an adult male dating an adult female. 41yr old men date 20yr old women all the time.

75

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Westclock wrote:

Wait, I thought we were talking about 17-year-old girls. 17-year-old girls are, “by definition” not pre-pubescent, inasmuch as the onset of puberty generally occurs in the early teens.

I’m curious, Westclock. At what age do you figure that it becomes “a little creepy” for a man to have sex with a 19-year old woman? Certainly not 20. Nor 30, I would imagine.

40? 35? Do I hear 37 and a half?

At what age does a girl become a woman? Biologically speaking, it’s at whatever age she has her first period. At that time, she is, “by definition,” of breeding age. This is generally age 13, although in the inner cities (thanks in large part to hormones in hamburgers), it’s not uncommon for girls to experience menarche at the age of 8.

And once again, a seventeen-year-old is NOT physically, legally (in most jurisdictions), nor emotionally (in most cultures) a child. By definition.[/quote]

Jailbait is difficult to define on a whole as it differs from state to state by definition, that site goes all the way to 13.

The term Jailbait, SPECIFICALLY implies that the girls are not legal, SPECIFICALLY implies that they are too young, that they are still children, that it is wrong, and that it is pedophilia.

You can argue what is and what isnt jailbait, but the truth is, simply “calling” it jailbait very clearly states the illegality of the girls presented and the viewer’s intention to look at overly sexualized children.

Its clear, its black and white, theres no debating around that.

Now that said, we can argue relative morality and such till we’re all dead, but here are my views:

I have admitted before in another thread to sleeping with a 17 year old when I was 20. I dont think it was wrong or creepy, if anything I was the reluctant party, and she was the very aggressive instigator.

One year makes a pretty big difference when your in the middle of puberty.

And CERTAINLY, 2-3 years is a huge difference during puberty.

If you could be the girl’s father its creepy, I think thats a pretty fair assumption. SHE could be YOUR daughter. But agian this is a social stigma, it is decided upon by the whims of the average population.

I live in the south, the average population does not approve.

If I lived in Sweden I would likely be arguing the other direction, this is a social element, and no amount of debate will change your upbringing.

And the first period does not indicate maturity, were you mature when you balls first dropped ?

Absolutely not, beginning puberty and being fully grown are different things, dont confuse them.

Men arent fully grown till 25 or so.

Women I believe its more like 22, or slightly younger.

A 17 year old girl is physically; a partially developed child

emotionally; is relative but the brain isnt fully developed so its easy to argue that she is emotionally and mentally imature.

Legality has little bearing on this discussion as maturity from a biological perspective is not the same for all people groups, or cultures. It is simply a reflection of the average values of that area.

Legality should therefor be simply and average interpretation of the first two, physical, and emotional, and should therefor be covered by simply examining the first two criteria.

For example, your “age” biologically speaking, would be based on cell division, metabolism, and even telomere length.

Saying a girl is 18 and legal, doesnt mean shes as mature mentally or physically, or biologically as another girl the same “numerical age”.

76

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
But you are assuming that is why I think there should be safeguards on minors. We don’t let minors enter into contracts either. [/quote]

I joined the Army when I was sixteen (granted, with parental permission). That was a contract. Seems if a boy is old enough to fight and die, a girl is old enough to have sex. [quote]

Well, if it makes you feel any better, the youngest girl I ever dated was 18, and I was 23 at the time. Then again, I also dated a 41-year-old woman when I was 20, which probably creeps you out.

why? you were an adult male dating an adult female. 41yr old men date 20yr old women all the time.
[/quote]

But now we get back to what I was saying to Westclock. How do we define adulthood? Biologically, legally, or emotionally?

If 41 and 20 is okay, why not 37 and 16? Same two people, same age differential. A 20-year-old might have put on a few pounds of subcutaneous fat around her hips and breasts in those four years, but her body is essentially the same at 16 and 20.

What about 38 and 17? Still icky? Okay, would 39 and 18 be all right?

If 39 and 18 is okay, but 37 and 16 is not, then I would have to know what is it about the number 18 that somehow confers “rightness” to sexual activity.

Couldn’t be the law, because as I said the law in most states allow sex at ages 16 or 17.

Couldn’t be biology, because as I said a girl who is old enough to bear children herself is an adult, according to Mother Nature.

So it must be nothing more than that implacable feeling in your gut that an 18-year-old girl can somehow handle the responsibility of sexual intercourse, but until the day that she attains this magical age, she is a “minor” in need of our “protection.”

77

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
But you are assuming that is why I think there should be safeguards on minors. We don’t let minors enter into contracts either.

I joined the Army when I was sixteen (granted, with parental permission). That was a contract. Seems if a boy is old enough to fight and die, a girl is old enough to have sex.

Well, if it makes you feel any better, the youngest girl I ever dated was 18, and I was 23 at the time. Then again, I also dated a 41-year-old woman when I was 20, which probably creeps you out.

why? you were an adult male dating an adult female. 41yr old men date 20yr old women all the time.

But now we get back to what I was saying to Westclock. How do we define adulthood? Biologically, legally, or emotionally?

If 41 and 20 is okay, why not 37 and 16? Same two people, same age differential. A 20-year-old might have put on a few pounds of subcutaneous fat around her hips and breasts in those four years, but her body is essentially the same at 16 and 20.

What about 38 and 17? Still icky? Okay, would 39 and 18 be all right?

If 39 and 18 is okay, but 37 and 16 is not, then I would have to know what is it about the number 18 that somehow confers “rightness” to sexual activity.

Couldn’t be the law, because as I said the law in most states allow sex at ages 16 or 17.

Couldn’t be biology, because as I said a girl who is old enough to bear children herself is an adult, according to Mother Nature.

So it must be nothing more than that implacable feeling in your gut that an 18-year-old girl can somehow handle the responsibility of sexual intercourse, but until the day that she attains this magical age, she is a “minor” in need of our “protection.”[/quote]

as a 16yr old you could not enter into that contract without the permission of your parents unless you were somehow emancipated by the Court. Courts have witnessed many cases of why minors need to be protected from their own bad decision making skills.

entering puberty is not the hallmark of adulthood.

I started my period when I was 11yrs old, should I then be married and banging out the kids?

no, I should not. Somethings are not put down to, “the female is now menstruating and should be bred.”

so let’s not you tell me that it is my “implacable feeling” that something is wrong. The reason why states have varying ages is because this issue is subjective.

and let’s not put things down to the rule of nature, because in the rule of nature some new males kill any prior offspring.

There is a big gap in maturity between a 16yr old and 19yr old in most cases.

If you choose not to see the truth in that then there isn’t really anything to discuss. But do I think a 36yr old guy should be dating a 16yr old girl? no, because yes I do think it is icky.

78

[quote]WolBarret wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
WolBarret wrote:
This thread just got serious.

Varqanir vs the World. And he’s winning.

ah well if you’ve called it then everyone should retire the field, you would be the last word

Not at all. Keep going. This is one of the few debates that haven’t resorted to name calling. Both sides are using logic and being respectful. [/quote]

poopy head

79

[quote]Makavali wrote:
WolBarret wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
WolBarret wrote:
This thread just got serious.

Varqanir vs the World. And he’s winning.

ah well if you’ve called it then everyone should retire the field, you would be the last word

Not at all. Keep going. This is one of the few debates that haven’t resorted to name calling. Both sides are using logic and being respectful.

poopy head[/quote]

Poop licker!

80

The age of the consent, in my opinion, isn’t there to determine whether a girl or boy is mature enough (in any respect) to have sex. It’s just a safety line. Obviously, every individual is different, but the safety line is there to prevent people taking advantage of someone that may not be mature enough (to reject a proposal, to comprehend the risks, or to be able to take the physical pressure) to have sex.

I mean, Varqinir you do have a point, there might be some 13 year old out there who could be (for whatever reason) equipped and willing to fuck the world. But that puts the vulnerable kids within a legal range of someone who could take advantage, and in my opinion, it’s simply not worth it.

This is a flawed argument mate. 41 & 20, 37 & 16, 21 & 10. It’s not maths, and it’s not simply about age difference.

I’m not suggesting a law stops that kind of stuff because some people will go that way regardless. But there should be some kind of limit. Who knows, things might change and sleeping with young teenagers might be okay one day, but it’s not something I’m going to dabble in.

For the record, I’m not suggesting anyone does that here, I’m just giving some input.