…But if he had basically been like most of us when we wondered what a naked woman looked like, we had a computer…
[/quote]
No, “we” didn’t.
With your logic incest between siblings would’ve been much higher before the 1990’s, right?
[/quote]
Na because of you’re weird ass friends, big brothers, whatever, with their dirty jokes and “educational” talks that numbed the curiosity. When the shine is taking off of something then the curiosity is reduced.
[/quote]
Bullshit. In fact, it’s the other way around.
Agreed.
[quote]
Only they had other kids to play it with. His only outlet was his sisters. Not all kids are going to have curiosity at that level. But the ones that do, will find an outlet. He found his. (And because he was so sheltered, it was really the only one available to him)[/quote]
How do you know all of this? Are you their biographer or at least read their biography?[/quote]
I have probably watched more of the tv show than anyone in this thread. My wife loves it and we have watched it at least since we have been married. So yeah, I do have a little insight (admittedly only what they are willing to share)
Curiosity, if intense enough, will find an outlet. Not saying that porn should be provided, or that showing him hyper sexualized materials would be the right thing to do. But if he had basically been like most of us when we wondered what a naked woman looked like, we had a computer. Porn is still an unhealthy outlet. His outlet, which was the only one available to him, just had a victim.
[/quote]
How ever did society avoid mass incest rape anarchy before digital media and public schooling, I wonder? [/quote]
Public school has nothing to do with it. Association with other children does though. And how the fuck would we know how much sister touching (probably a shit ton) has went on because frankly such things were never news before now.
Also, its important to note that at no other time in our history as mankind has a boy going through puberty had fewer healthy outlets for his raging hormones and aggression than right now. Throughout history, there have been outlets for boys (fighting, work, sport, etc.) where they vent some of these frustrations. Boys aren’t exposed to that as much now and it gives sexual curiosity more time to brood. Watch the show and their lifestyle, Josh volunteered at a car lot when he was a teen, didn’t play sports and was expected to be this relatively docile child (oldest brother followed by several girls).
He chose to mess around with his sisters because he was sexually aroused by them (which basically sets him up as a pedophile)
[/quote]
I’m not sure you know what pedophilia is. A prepubescent boy attracted to prepubescent girls doesn’t have anything to do with pedophilia. It’s normal.[/quote]
14-15 isn’t prepubescent. And the fact that one of his victims was a small child easily makes my either/or argument valid. So yes, I understand the definition of pedophilia, and what he did, if done out of more than twisted curiosity, is pedophilia, by definition.
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Also, its important to note that at no other time in our history as mankind has a boy going through puberty had fewer healthy outlets for his raging hormones and aggression than right now.
[/quote]
This is serious problem and not just relating to sexuality.
How ever did society avoid mass incest rape anarchy before digital media and public schooling, I wonder? [/quote]
Maybe it was really widespread and no one bothered to ever talk about it?[/quote]
Yeah, that’s probably it. [/quote]
Lol. Good thing think TV and public schooling have finally arrived after thousands of years to save our society.
[/quote]
That’s good point. I wonder what the utopian society according to the media would look like. Clearly, sex of all kind and nature are permissible according to TV and radio. God forbid a school teach that any particular sexual practice be frowned upon, oh the outrage if you explain that a human colon was not designed to be repeatedly penetrated by a cylindrical object 6x1 inch or larger that could cause tears and various other types of damage to an organ that was basically designed to be a one way street and full of all kinds of caustic bacteria. That’s bigoted, whether accurate or not.
But golly, the Duggars are BAD. We should stick with wholesome shows like ‘Real House Wives’, Kardashians, ‘Sex in the City’ and ‘Orange is the New Black’, etc.
And all the pop music is sex, sex, sex, sex with a side of sex. It’s enough to make ‘Two Live Crew’ blush. Or your radio morning radio shows, holy shit. Celebrity gossip which is usually sexual and just sex talk, sex jokes, sex gags.
I am far from prudish about the topic or music, but for fuck’s sake, I am literally tired of sex as a topic. I am just sick and tired of hearing about sex all the fucking time. Surely that are other things to talk about. Surely, there more to life then penises and vaginas, surely.
I am not bothered by it because of my beliefs, because it’s taboo, because it’s risky or anything else. I am just plain sick and tired of drowning in sex talk 24/7. Am I the only one who feels that way? I like sex just as much as anybody else, but the topic has been beaten to death, resurrected beat to death again, run over and beaten some more. And it has permeated all media and that’s all they talk about. Try to watch an hour of TV without sex coming up at some point. It’s almost impossible unless you put it on EWTN and rip the knob off the TV. Try to listen to the radio for an hour and not have heard 5 songs about sex.
Like I said, am I the only one who feels that’s sick of sex as a topic for the pure reason that it’s over done? At some point, I like to talk about other shit.
You have any information on how prevalent those things were back at the end of the 19th century or anything?
The point is, private matters stayed private. For the most part, we have no idea what people actually did in their private lives.
It’s not like we have any information on how much rape occurred in the 19th century or anything, or how many children at least satisfied their sexual curiosity by ogling their sister or brother’s private parts.
Unless, of course, you do have information on that. Then I’m all ears.
You have any information on how prevalent those things were back at the end of the 19th century or anything?
The point is, private matters stayed private. For the most part, we have no idea what people actually did in their private lives.
It’s not like we have any information on how much rape occurred in the 19th century or anything, or how many children at least satisfied their sexual curiosity by ogling their sister or brother’s private parts.
Unless, of course, you do have information on that. Then I’m all ears.[/quote]
It seems like the person making the claim that social media and sexual exposure makes kids act out less might need some information like that. You are claiming that it was way worse then? Where’s your data?
Curiosity, if intense enough, will find an outlet. Not saying that porn should be provided, or that showing him hyper sexualized materials would be the right thing to do. But if he had basically been like most of us when we wondered what a naked woman looked like, we had a computer. Porn is still an unhealthy outlet. His outlet, which was the only one available to him, just had a victim.
[/quote]
How ever did society avoid mass incest rape anarchy before digital media and public schooling, I wonder? [/quote]
Well, it’s a large problem in Amish society so my guess is it wasn’t avoided, just unreported.
It seems like the person making the claim that social media and sexual exposure makes kids act out less might need some information like that. You are claiming that it was way worse then? Where’s your data?[/quote]
Sure, you’re right. It would help if jbpick86 gave some information to back his claims up.
And I am not claiming that it was worse then. Rather, I am claiming that neither party has provided any information to make the argument that things are better or worse now.
We have no idea how much incest and such things occurred back in the 19th century or before. We have no idea how much incest occurs now.
Curiosity, if intense enough, will find an outlet. Not saying that porn should be provided, or that showing him hyper sexualized materials would be the right thing to do. But if he had basically been like most of us when we wondered what a naked woman looked like, we had a computer. Porn is still an unhealthy outlet. His outlet, which was the only one available to him, just had a victim.
[/quote]
How ever did society avoid mass incest rape anarchy before digital media and public schooling, I wonder? [/quote]
Well, it’s a large problem in Amish society so my guess is it wasn’t avoided, just unreported.[/quote]
Modern Amish <> 1800s society. They don’t have electricity and stuff but I don’t think it’s a good comparison. Aside from the different religious aspects, modern Amish kids still are surrounded by the modern world and everything that goes with it.
Curiosity, if intense enough, will find an outlet. Not saying that porn should be provided, or that showing him hyper sexualized materials would be the right thing to do. But if he had basically been like most of us when we wondered what a naked woman looked like, we had a computer. Porn is still an unhealthy outlet. His outlet, which was the only one available to him, just had a victim.
[/quote]
How ever did society avoid mass incest rape anarchy before digital media and public schooling, I wonder? [/quote]
Well, it’s a large problem in Amish society so my guess is it wasn’t avoided, just unreported.[/quote]
Modern Amish <> 1800s society. They don’t have electricity and stuff but I don’t think it’s a good comparison. Aside from the different religious aspects, modern Amish kids still are surrounded by the modern world and everything that goes with it.[/quote]
Perhaps not, it’s the closet thing I could think of.
But we do know that it makes perfect sense that the more electronically borne porn that’s made available by modern technology the less “curiosity”…blah…blah…blah…less incest and sexual assault, right?
[/quote]
Huh?
Did you actually bother to read what I wrote?
I mean, isn’t that why I wrote “It would help if jbpick86 gave some information to back his claims up”?