Galder Posts
Count Alucard wrote...
ecchigaijin wrote...
Less likely does not equate not likely at all. But I get it. Screw the people who it may effect, make it legal for the boys that are ready for it. Those other boys, they aren't really men anyhow.
Nice. I personally think we should be watching out the minority that would regret such actions, since the adults who go after young children - of either sex - are nothing better than predators anyhow. But stand up for the predator, why don't you?
Oh I'm against sex with biological children(someone who has not reached puberty) but 13-15 is usually not a child but a sexual being. I wouldn't consider people of either gender who goes for that age group to be predators unless its of an manipulative nature. And most of these women who are involved with teen boys are not predators seeing as how 83% of their relationships is just causal sex.
However, there were also some key differences between the two types of relationships. For example, adolescent males were more likely to view the relationship as casual (83% v. 38%), and be considerably younger than the adult (51% of adolescent males, in comparison to 36% of adolescent females, report an age gap of 5 or more years)
http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/CV150.pdf#page14 (page 6)
We're talking about a 5% negative reaction from males vs a 81% negative reaction from females. We already have irrational gender double standards in the law. Why not have a rational one where the age of consent is 13 for boys and 16 for girls(misdemeanor if she is 13-15)?
In regards to your first point, about a person 13-15 "not being a child but being a sexual being"... well, if that were the case, I doubt the entire world would have laws against sex with a "sexual being" of that age.
And again, your point is that the 5% aren't worth saving? Really? I am super happy you are not in a position to change laws. I see the 5% as being worth keeping a law that protects them from psychological trauma, and you see them as a ROADBLOCK to the ones who can handle it getting it on with older woman. Very classy.
Count Alucard wrote...
ecchigaijin wrote...
Count Alucard wrote...
ecchigaijin wrote...
Count Alucard wrote...
ecchigaijin wrote...
"Meant to reproduce by 13"? I think you MAY mean "capable of". And there's a LONG SHOT between "capable of" and "mentally and emotionally ready for".
Not justifying sexual activity at 13. But Its pretty obvious that is what evolution is telling our bodies at 13 to do when we start ejaculating and having high sex drives.
Right. Obviously society at large believes, as I do, that the body being ready and the person being ready are two very different things.
But you're right. Wet dreams and sexual urges are totally the sign that we're ready for a sexual relationship. Our body says so! Pfft.
I sure it was pretty common to have children by that time back in the day. Again, not justifying sexual activity at 13.
Pretty common for people to die well before 40, too. You know, back in the day.
Where did you hear that from and why is that relevant?
Btw, don't we already have gender bias laws like censorship of female breast? I found it strange that double standard exists but not one regarding statutory rape seeing as male teens are far less vulnerable to exploitation, manipulation and less likely to regret the sex than teen girls.
Less likely does not equate not likely at all. But I get it. Screw the people who it may effect, make it legal for the boys that are ready for it. Those other boys, they aren't really men anyhow.
Nice. I personally think we should be watching out the minority that would regret such actions, since the adults who go after young children - of either sex - are nothing better than predators anyhow. But stand up for the predator, why don't you?
I still don't get how this is an example of Toys'R'Us doing a 'bad' thing. Sure, if you can find evidence that they actually sell the games to kids, then nail the people doing it to the wall.
Otherwise:
1) Kids are going to want to play these games.
2) Parents will continue to let them play these games in order to stop them from asking for it all the time.
Do you think the kids going to this store also don't end up at Gamestop, too? And as long as CoD or whatever is "cool" amongst school aged children, there will continue to be backpacks, shirts, whatever sold to kids for them.
The weak point here is the parents, but by all means, pin it on a store chain.
Otherwise:
1) Kids are going to want to play these games.
2) Parents will continue to let them play these games in order to stop them from asking for it all the time.
Do you think the kids going to this store also don't end up at Gamestop, too? And as long as CoD or whatever is "cool" amongst school aged children, there will continue to be backpacks, shirts, whatever sold to kids for them.
The weak point here is the parents, but by all means, pin it on a store chain.
mdarkanima wrote...
Personally, and I'm going to be blunt. I cannot stand this woman, and the fact that my S.O. finds her, in his words "gorgeous", severely disturbs me.
I'm not in North America now, so have no idea who this person is, but it reminds me how loads of people had a thing for Sarah Jessica Parker, and I always thought she had a face that reminded me of a horse.
It's not illegal for kids to play those games, just to buy them. As long as Toys'r'Us is not actively selling these items to kids, they're following the law, which is all you can really ask. Well, you could raise said aforementioned stink.
Although the main intended customer base of the store is obviously young children and their parents, they're not going to ignore parents who game (and we're entering the age where many of the parents of kids nowadays were/are gamers).
Although the main intended customer base of the store is obviously young children and their parents, they're not going to ignore parents who game (and we're entering the age where many of the parents of kids nowadays were/are gamers).
Count Alucard wrote...
ecchigaijin wrote...
Count Alucard wrote...
ecchigaijin wrote...
"Meant to reproduce by 13"? I think you MAY mean "capable of". And there's a LONG SHOT between "capable of" and "mentally and emotionally ready for".
Not justifying sexual activity at 13. But Its pretty obvious that is what evolution is telling our bodies at 13 to do when we start ejaculating and having high sex drives.
Right. Obviously society at large believes, as I do, that the body being ready and the person being ready are two very different things.
But you're right. Wet dreams and sexual urges are totally the sign that we're ready for a sexual relationship. Our body says so! Pfft.
I sure it was pretty common to have children by that time back in the day. Again, not justifying sexual activity at 13.
Pretty common for people to die well before 40, too. You know, back in the day.
Count Alucard wrote...
ecchigaijin wrote...
"Meant to reproduce by 13"? I think you MAY mean "capable of". And there's a LONG SHOT between "capable of" and "mentally and emotionally ready for".
Not justifying sexual activity at 13. But Its pretty obvious that is what evolution is telling our bodies at 13 to do when we start ejaculating and having high sex drives.
Right. Obviously society at large believes, as I do, that the body being ready and the person being ready are two very different things.
But you're right. Wet dreams and sexual urges are totally the sign that we're ready for a sexual relationship. Our body says so! Pfft.
Count Alucard wrote...
ecchigaijin wrote...
I'm sure we can rely on those results, as even to psychological professionals, no guy is going to feel comfortable negatively commenting on sex they got from an older girl. I just don't think - even with a psychiatrist - males would feel comfortable saying that. I doubt the 5% carries the weight they think it does.
Granted, it's printed and an actual study, I just think it has little to no actual value. How many studies have been done on how many people lie on stuff on anonymous surveys anyhow? Household income? No one's going to see that, and yet studies show people always push the numbers up a couple of categories. I'm sure something more embarrassing - how you felt about a sexual relationship with a woman - would garner the same kind of changes. Not saying it's 50% negative, but I sincerely doubt it's 5.
Considering the fact that males are pretty much meant to reproduce by 13 I think it is pretty accurate. Remember when you were 13,14, and 15 fantasizing about older women? Though results are different when it's with a person in a position of authority or so I heard.
"Meant to reproduce by 13"? I think you MAY mean "capable of". And there's a LONG SHOT between "capable of" and "mentally and emotionally ready for".
Count Alucard wrote...
ecchigaijin wrote...
Count Alucard wrote...
gizgal wrote...
...except that for young male identified survivors of rape and sexual assault, yeah NO.I think they might tell you otherwise: they would not "wish" any of it upon them any more than their female counterparts would.
To say "Oh man, nice!/Wish it were me!/etc." so only belittles young male survivors' valid claims of abuse. For them, sex can be forever fucked up in their mind as something not to enjoy but dread.
Applauding and making light of their attackers just normalizes the notion that males can't be raped by females or males (yes, many say that term, laughing, but not many places do much about male-on-male rape in the justice system).
We're talking about unlawful sex with minors, not rape. Adult male fooling around with female minors 13-15 doesn't seem too bad. Came across this recently.
Two studies have investigated the association between age difference and aspects of females' sexual debut. Abma and colleagues used 1995 NSFG data to examine partner age difference in the context of measuring "wantedness" of first intercourse. Their findings suggested that wantedness is inversely related to the age difference between a young woman and her partner, and that it may be related to her limited control over the situation.6 Furthermore, Leitenberg and Saltzman found that among females who had had first sexual intercourse at ages 11-12, those who had a partner five or more years their senior had an elevated risk of attempted suicide, substance abuse and pregnancy. Among females who had had first intercourse between the ages of 13 and 15, having older partners was associated only with truancy. In contrast, among females whose age at first intercourse was 16-18, having older partners was not linked to these negative outcomes. Thus, adverse effects of partner age difference may lessen as females mature.7
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3430402.html
The reversal would probably be less bad.
Doubt you'll ever see a study on the reverse effects since "any young man worth his stones should be totally willing to jump on any older woman who flirts with him".
Funny you should because I actually did find some data on saying that.
How do adolescent males view their sexual relationships with adult females? Some studies show that if the relationship was not forced and the female adult was not a relative, a majority of males viewed these relationships as positive (Condy et al., 1987; Okami, 1991), about a third viewed them as neutral (Fromuth & Burkhart, 1987; Okami, 1991), and a minority (b5%) viewed them as negative (Fromuth & Burkhart, 1987). Nonetheless, they had slightly elevated levels of psychological distress: they had slightly more psychological, alcohol, and deliberate self-harming behavior problems than men without such experiences, but they were not as distressed as those who experienced forced sexual encounters (King et al., 2003).
http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/CV150.pdf#page14
Rather unsurprising, I'm sure we can all agree.
I'm sure we can rely on those results, as even to psychological professionals, no guy is going to feel comfortable negatively commenting on sex they got from an older girl. I just don't think - even with a psychiatrist - males would feel comfortable saying that. I doubt the 5% carries the weight they think it does.
Granted, it's printed and an actual study, I just think it has little to no actual value. How many studies have been done on how many people lie on stuff on anonymous surveys anyhow? Household income? No one's going to see that, and yet studies show people always push the numbers up a couple of categories. I'm sure something more embarrassing - how you felt about a sexual relationship with a woman - would garner the same kind of changes. Not saying it's 50% negative, but I sincerely doubt it's 5.
Count Alucard wrote...
gizgal wrote...
...except that for young male identified survivors of rape and sexual assault, yeah NO.I think they might tell you otherwise: they would not "wish" any of it upon them any more than their female counterparts would.
To say "Oh man, nice!/Wish it were me!/etc." so only belittles young male survivors' valid claims of abuse. For them, sex can be forever fucked up in their mind as something not to enjoy but dread.
Applauding and making light of their attackers just normalizes the notion that males can't be raped by females or males (yes, many say that term, laughing, but not many places do much about male-on-male rape in the justice system).
We're talking about unlawful sex with minors, not rape. Adult male fooling around with female minors 13-15 doesn't seem too bad. Came across this recently.
Two studies have investigated the association between age difference and aspects of females' sexual debut. Abma and colleagues used 1995 NSFG data to examine partner age difference in the context of measuring "wantedness" of first intercourse. Their findings suggested that wantedness is inversely related to the age difference between a young woman and her partner, and that it may be related to her limited control over the situation.6 Furthermore, Leitenberg and Saltzman found that among females who had had first sexual intercourse at ages 11-12, those who had a partner five or more years their senior had an elevated risk of attempted suicide, substance abuse and pregnancy. Among females who had had first intercourse between the ages of 13 and 15, having older partners was associated only with truancy. In contrast, among females whose age at first intercourse was 16-18, having older partners was not linked to these negative outcomes. Thus, adverse effects of partner age difference may lessen as females mature.7
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3430402.html
The reversal would probably be less bad.
Doubt you'll ever see a study on the reverse effects since "any young man worth his stones should be totally willing to jump on any older woman who flirts with him".
Chlor wrote...
Chlor wrote...
Yeah, I'll not adress the wage gap, since you're probably right. Let me talk about your other points.I thought a quote's point was to completely and accurately reflect the source, not paraphrase. But... by all means, whatever makes you feel cooler, I suppose.
Not seeing this here, so do the people who will need to look into this a favor and let them know what exactly you're browsing with on your iPad. Is it the default Safari, Chrome, something else?
SneeakyAsian wrote...
that most Japanese (that I've met) don't even know what it's for...Like the Santa bit, or the Jesus' birthday bit? I'm figuring you're going with the Christian angle, or you really live in the inaka.
Edit: Oh yeah, spending it with my in-laws. Not that we'll be doing much other than the wife and I giving each other something. And the cake.
And the ever-loving KFC.
labbeltran wrote...
Is this essentially a "male privilege in America" thread? Because otherwise it really does come down to where you live."
To be frank, I do not know enough about wage gap statistics in the international community to be able to give you a good answer. However, when one considers that many cultures/societies are patriarchal in nature, it insinuates that the wage gap is not idiosyncratic to the United States. Also, other privileges such as white privilege, are observable across the international community.
I hail from the upstairs neighbour (eh), and wherever I've worked, I've never encountered any wage gap in comparable positions. But then, we have more rules in place about that sort of thing. I haven't worked across the whole country, so I won't say it applies to the whole nation, but to the places I've worked, there are loads of rules in place to ensure different sexes, minorities, et al have the same wage expectations.
That being said, I live in Japan now, and I'll say I'm sure the wage gap certainly exists here. Heck, I know some women in positions that before would not be available to them, and am still hearing things said about them behind their back that remind me in some ways, Japan is way behind the times.
Well, if you read raws, it'll give you insight on how Japanese people talk "dirty" (within reason, of course), which can help you get that vocabulary down.
They don't exactly cover that in normal Japanese courses.
I don't know that it's "good" for you, but if you enjoy it, good on you? I know a lot of things I do have no health benefits, persay, but they don't harm me, either.
They don't exactly cover that in normal Japanese courses.
I don't know that it's "good" for you, but if you enjoy it, good on you? I know a lot of things I do have no health benefits, persay, but they don't harm me, either.
I don't watch porn, generally. I'd watch Japanese porn if I could deal with mosaics. Or spontaneous weird shit.
I do like Koala's March chocolates, though.
I do like Koala's March chocolates, though.
Grizzinmypants wrote...
Drifter995 wrote...
It depends on the person, but probably not, tbh. Maybe fuck, but doubt I could date one. I can't really explain it, but It's just one of those things.It's just an embedded gene deep in your unconscious that makes you group with people more like yourself. That includes race. "Birds of a feather" is a saying for a reason. Now you don't have to hate other races,(I certainly don't) but the majority of people will find it difficult to be in an extended relationship with someone of another race. Again that doesn't mean you have to be a racist, but nobody truly "doesn't see race". Those people annoy me more than anything because they are blatant liars.
Is it a gene, or is it deep in your unconscious? I hate to be a nitpicker, just want to know which you're claiming it is.
Whichever it is, mine has obviously flaked out, and a good amount of my friends, too. Whether at "home", or here, I know plenty of people in mixed race relationships who are doing just fine, or better, than people who "stick with their own".
Mr. Popo wrote...
I am curious about death. I know that no one alive knows the answers to my questions, but I've always wondered what it was like to die. Don't think of me as like a serial killerI think if you were a serial killer you'd be more focused on what it feels like to take a life than how it feels to have yours taken away and experience what's after death.
The reasons why I would do either hardly both rely on race.
I wouldn't date or sleep with a smoker, or a heavy drinker/drug user, etc. The stuff that's behaviour based and certainly not limited to a certain race. Weight can also have something to do with it, but again, any woman of any race can be morbidly obese.
I've made my bed and enjoy laying in it nightly, being married, so this is not a real question for me, but still...
I wouldn't date or sleep with a smoker, or a heavy drinker/drug user, etc. The stuff that's behaviour based and certainly not limited to a certain race. Weight can also have something to do with it, but again, any woman of any race can be morbidly obese.
I've made my bed and enjoy laying in it nightly, being married, so this is not a real question for me, but still...
