BF interested in Young girls?????

[shadowplay]

"She's not even developed or sexual."

 

She looks OK at 17 to me. The ones of her younger are just head shots. If you want a valid opinion post full body shots.

 

I think many female celebs are gonna fall into the early bloomer category simply due to the nature of the business.

 

 

I'm gonna mostly ignore the feeble shaming attempt.

 

Interesting that Scarlett's and most sex symbols careers take off in their early twenties, not when they're fifteen or sixteen.

 

Here are some more of Scarlett at 22: http://www.allsexycelebs.com/pictures/scarlett_johansson/ScarlettJohansson_TheIsland_hkb1.jpg

Not fresh enough for you?

[clv0116]

If you really find those photos the most gorgeous, I'll just say you have "unusual" taste that doesn't conform to what is generally considered beautiful according to Hollywood.

 

She's also clearly taking more care of herself as far as being able to afford time to exercise and eat right as she's become more affluent. I watched some clips of her in those programs and some stills, she looks mature to me.

[clv0116]

Here are some more of Scarlett at 22: http://www.allsexycelebs.com/pictures/scarlett_johansson/ScarlettJohansson_TheIsland_hkb1.jpg

Not fresh enough for you?

 

Of course, she's one of the sexiest women on earth. No need to foist your insecurities onto me and get nasty. This looking at hot women thing is fun but it's pretty pointless. They're all hot and in the right circumstances I'd hit most of them.

[shadowplay]

Of course, she's one of the sexiest women on earth. No need to foist your insecurities onto me and get nasty. This looking at hot women thing is fun but it's pretty pointless. They're all hot and in the right circumstances I'd hit most of them.

 

I'm not being nasty. I just find it a bit bizarre that you find the 15-16-17-year-old version of Scarlett more attractive.

[shadowplay]

She's also clearly taking more care of herself as far as being able to afford time to exercise and eat right as she's become more affluent. I watched some clips of her in those programs and some stills, she looks mature to me.

 

Her face was too round when she was younger (I don't think this had to do with exercise so much as excess baby fat because her body was the same), but maybe you like round faces. If you do that's cool, but it's not the classic standard of beauty.

[clv0116]

I'm not being nasty. I just find it a bit bizarre that you find the 15-16-17-year-old version of Scarlett more attractive.

 

 

Well she's attractive at 17 for sure, I'd have to see more of her than her face to say when she first looked like she was in my comfort zone. While Hollywood clearly disapproved of her nose, I think it's sort of cute and while I'm sure the alteration has made her more marketable and thus made her more money, I think she was adorable before as well.

 

If she was in my Viking village at 17 I wouldn't wait around to see what the other guys were gonna do, I can assure you of that.

[shadowplay]

Well she's attractive at 17 for sure, I'd have to see more of her than her face to say when she first looked like she was in my comfort zone. While Hollywood clearly disapproved of her nose, I think it's sort of cute and while I'm sure the alteration has made her more marketable and thus made her more money, I think she was adorable before as well.

 

If she was in my Viking village at 17 I wouldn't wait around to see what the other guys were gonna do, I can assure you of that.

 

I get the sense you're arguing for a position you don't fully believe in, or there's some confusion about the point I'm making.

 

I'll just ask you. Do you believe that most adult men find women who are 16 or 17 more sexually attractive than women who are 20 or 21? If you say it depends or that men find a range of women attractive, you're not actually disagreeing with me...which leaves me confused as to the point you're making.

[clv0116]

...which leaves me confused as to the point you're making.

 

I'm saying it's natural for a man to find a sexually mature 16 year old attractive. This started when you said it wasn't natural and I disagreed.

[shadowplay]

I'm saying it's natural for a man to find a sexually mature 16 year old attractive. This started when you said it wasn't natural and I disagreed.

 

See this is where the miscommunication seems to have arisen. I disagreed with the idea that most men would rather have sex with a sixteen year old over a twenty year old. I never argued that men can't find a fully developed sixteen year old attractive. (It's just that most sixteen year olds look like kids.)

 

You didn't answer my question about whether you think most adult men would rather have sex with a sixteen year old than a twenty year old.

[clv0116]

You didn't answer my question about whether you think most adult men would rather have sex with a sixteen year old than a twenty year old.

 

I've never taken a poll but I did notice a few nifty studies cited a while back in this very thread.

[shadowplay]

I've never taken a poll but I did notice a few nifty studies cited a while back in this very thread.

 

The first study, which would be most relevant to this thread, is just an abstract. How can I evaluate the validity of the study without reading more about it? I did a google search online and only found the abstract. It wouldn't let me open the actual paper without a subscription to the journal. But one thing I'll note before I see the whole study is that it was done on male college students, presumably between the ages of 18 and 22. I think that's an important point.

[clv0116]

The first study ....

 

I think the insistence that a man has to be MORE attracted to X than Y is a sort of red herring. No two people are alike, everyone peaks differently, etc. In places where women don't tend to get chubby at a young age things are different too. In general if I saw a woman I was interested in, if it wasn't for legal considerations I wouldn't consider her age, I'd get to know her immediately.

 

I suspect that's the natural way, in places where age of consent laws are non-existent or ignored, women are commonly paired off from 15 and up to guys that are often a bit older. In fact on my last vacation I saw a lot of guys in their 40 and up with women half that age, it was pretty common.

[Jersey Shortie]

I get the sense you're arguing for a position you don't fully believe in, or there's some confusion about the point I'm making.

 

 

I get the impression that he does and that he would hook up with 16 year olds if he could. But Clv has some deep seeded issues with women and alot of bitterness. So it would fall into that line of thinking that JackJack discussed about certain men finding such girls attractive because of their own lack in feeling like men and needing some one so much younger to control.

[shadowplay]

I get the impression that he does and that he would hook up with 16 year olds if he could. But Clv has some deep seeded issues with women and alot of bitterness. So it would fall into that line of thinking that JackJack discussed about certain men finding such girls attractive because of their own lack in feeling like men and needing some one so much younger to control.

 

I have no doubt there are plenty of men like CLV who prefer teenage girls, but I get annoyed when they use their preferences to make generalizations about all men. In the last day or two, I've taken an informal poll of guys I know (ages ranging from 23-28) and none of them expressed a preference for girls that young. In fact all of them stated that they prefer women who AREN'T in their teens for both long and short term relationships.

[Paragon]

The first study, which would be most relevant to this thread, is just an abstract. How can I evaluate the validity of the study without reading more about it? I did a google search online and only found the abstract. It wouldn't let me open the actual paper without a subscription to the journal. But one thing I'll note before I see the whole study is that it was done on male college students, presumably between the ages of 18 and 22. I think that's an important point.

 

You can't because you don't have the CREDENTIALS which allow access to the study, which is a very important point i've been trying to make. You shouldn't be asserting the things you are because you lack the credentials to back them up. You'll have to take my word and the evidence of the posted abstract that it is VALID. If you still would rather doubt, do some research on the names--they're VERY valid But leave it up to someone who's wrong to try and bob and weave their song and dance saying post YOUR credentials--done. Well post some studies backing up what you say--DONE. Well don't post the abstract, post the whole thing--copyright infringement. I've backed up EVERYTHING i've said so far, and if you want to say you're STILL doubting the validity after all the backing up i've done, I think that makes it VERY clear how you just don't want to give in to the fact that you're thoughts are wrong. Which is why you wasted so much time trying to talk about your hollywood examples, which have NO relevance if I can point to a study demonstrating perfectly clear to what men prefer.

 

In the last day or two, I've taken an informal poll of guys I know (ages ranging from 23-28) and none of them expressed a preference for girls that young. In fact all of them stated that they prefer women who AREN'T in their teens for both long and short term relationships.

 

Well, ya see the OP wasn't concerned about her bf leaving her for Miley Cyrus and other young girls he was googling. She was 'creeped out' by his attraction for them. So, since you just ciriticized the sample from my SCHOLARLY study, I hope you wouldn't give more credence to your INFORMAL 'poll' which was conducted with experimenter bias and all other sorts of counfounding variables, especially since you asked the wrong question to begin with--it wasn't about what men what in regards to relaitonships, but rather what they want in regards to SEX, or what 'gets them off'. Not to mention the taboo lines and stigmas associated with actually admitting attraction to underage girls. Your informal poll, politely put, means Sh*t.

 

As for it being done on male college students, the ages they preferred were ILLEGAL, YOUNGER than their mean age. Isn't that why everyone disapproved so much of the OP's bf's behavior, because it was ILLEGAL, because of the drastic AGE DIFFERENCE?

 

And if memory serves correctly, uhm, which it does, the OP's bf was googling images of miley cyrus, and sexually mature looking underage girls. And here's where i'm going to use your own words against you:

 

I disagreed with the idea that most men would rather have sex with a sixteen year old over a twenty year old. I never argued that men can't find a fully developed sixteen year old attractive. (It's just that most sixteen year olds look like kids.)

 

So then you adimt then that it's perfectly natural for a man to be attracted to and want to have sex with a sexually mature 16 year old? You can argue about what men would RATHER want all day, as long as I know that you just admitted they'd still bed a 16 year old and have it be a natural attraction. Thank you

 

Oh, and most 16 year olds DO look like kids--but the OP's bf wasn't googling girls that looked 12--he was googling girls like Miley Cyrus that look a bit more sexually mature. So it seems as if YOUR argument points out that the OP's bf's behavior WASN'T really all that abnormal in the first place?

[Paragon]

I get the impression that he does and that he would hook up with 16 year olds if he could. But Clv has some deep seeded issues with women and alot of bitterness. So it would fall into that line of thinking that JackJack discussed about certain men finding such girls attractive because of their own lack in feeling like men and needing some one so much younger to control.

 

Surprise surprise, you're WRONG again. Do some research and look into WHY the men who are attracted to underage girls are. It has NOTHING to do with power or control. Nothing. Not one bit. At all. I'm sure JackJack thought he was very clever by introducing that kind of point, but--he's wrong. Again, have you TALKED to men who like underage girls and asked them why? Oh i'm sorry, I know I shouldn't have asked that because it's not a fair question, since earlier in the thread you admitted to NOT knowing ANYONE who's attracted to underage girls, which admittedly puts your EXPERIENCE and TRUE knowledge on the subject at--laughable--at best....

[Paragon]

I'm also not sure why Paragon chose her as she's far from "universally" attractive, if such a thing exists.

 

You've just demonstrated your ignorance ONCE AGAIN by NOT reading the thread, and it was the most important part at that--the OP's words!!! Miley Cyrus was an example of one of the girls who the OP's bf googled!!! That's why I chose her! Start reading the thread and paying attention here

 

And that wisecrack, about 'universally attractive'--beauty has a formula. I don't understand why you want to use your ignorance as leverage and evidence to prove someone wrong about a theory. Just because you haven't heard of it or don't know it doesn't mean it's not existent or true. Ya know, there DOES happen to be more scientific literature out there than what the general public is fed through pop culture and the mainstream media.

[Paragon]

I have no doubt there are plenty of men like CLV who prefer teenage girls, but I get annoyed when they use their preferences to make generalizations about all men.

 

THAT'S EXACTLY what you and Jersey have been doing the WHOLE ENTIRE TIME. You are women, women prefer mates of the same age, which is what you and Jersey are saying 'healthy' men should prefer. But, it's NOT!! See the RELEVANT (which you tried to say was actualy irrelevant, but were wrong) study below.

 

3) Compared males' and females' desired ages for mates. 70 males and 67 females (aged 19–21, 29–31, 39–41, 49–51, and 59–61 yrs) completed questionnaires concerning optimal partner ages in relation to the 5 relationship involvement levels of marriage, serious relationship, falling in love, casual sex, and sexual fantasies. Results show that females preferred partners of their own age, regardless of their own age and regardless of the level of relationship involvement. In contrast, males, regardless of their own age, desired mates for short-term mating and for sexual fantasies who were in their reproductive years.(PsycINFO Database Record © 2009 APA, all rights reserved)

 

K?

[silverfish]

A survey of 137 people in those age ranges - 19 to 61, male & female, isn't a conclusive study. You'd need much higher numbers than that to make it conclusive.

 

Also, the previous study you quoted only used men between the ages of 18 & 22. That's not a fair representation of male behaviour.

 

Plus, women are 'who are in their reproductive years' can be any age from 10 to 50 plus. It's a meaningless statement.

[Paragon]

A survey of 137 people in those age ranges - 19 to 61, male & female, isn't a conclusive study. You'd need much higher numbers than that to make it conclusive.

 

Spoken as someone who has an elementary understanding about statistics

 

A study, in order to be statistically significant has to do with PERCENTAGE, not quantity. But please, I would LOVE to hear what YOUR arbitrary number is for the sample size in order to have a study be generalizable or 'conclusive' as you call it. But I guess you haven't read enough studies to understand that 137 is actually a fairly decent and reputable sample size. And it's unfortunate that you didn't care or take the time to think about the fact that COUNTLESS other studies like this have been done with the results repeated time and time again, which is where these THEORIES that i'm talking about come from.

 

Also, the previous study you quoted only used men between the ages of 18 & 22. That's not a fair representation of male behaviour.

 

Hang onto this statement all you want, the mean age these men want is still UNDERAGE which is what all of you were b*tching about before and that's why you were 'creeped out' by it. But, if it's not, please do tell me at what number does the age difference become unhealthy? Well wait a minute here--you can't because that number, like the sample size number I asked you to give, is ARBITRARY and meaningless because it's NOTHING more than your OPINION.

 

Plus, women are 'who are in their reproductive years' can be any age from 10 to 50 plus. It's a meaningless statement.

 

It CAN mean that, but------it DOESN'T That's where a scientific background helps one make sense of somewhat vagues statements like that, or hell even access to the entire study would help clarify that objection for you. But, since you don't have those, I guess you can just stick to the fact that it's just MEANINGLESS--because that's a VERY logical conclusion....

Edited October 5, 2009 by Paragon

[shadowplay]

Spoken as someone who has an elementary understanding about statistics

 

A study, in order to be statistically significant has to do with PERCENTAGE, not quantity. But please, I would LOVE to hear what YOUR arbitrary number is for the sample size in order to have a study be generalizable or 'conclusive' as you call it. But I guess you haven't read enough studies to understand that 137 is actually a fairly decent and reputable sample size. And it's unfortunate that you didn't care or take the time to think about the fact that COUNTLESS other studies like this have been done with the results repeated time and time again, which is where these THEORIES that i'm talking about come from.

 

 

 

Hang onto this statement all you want, the mean age these men want is still UNDERAGE which is what all of you were b*tching about before and that's why you were 'creeped out' by it. But, if it's not, please do tell me at what number does the age difference become unhealthy? Well wait a minute here--you can't because that number, like the sample size number I asked you to give, is ARBITRARY and meaningless because it's NOTHING more than your OPINION.

 

 

 

It CAN mean that, but------it DOESN'T That's where a scientific background helps one make sense of somewhat vagues statements like that, or hell even access to the entire study would help clarify that objection for you. But, since you don't have those, I guess you can just stick to the fact that it's just MEANINGLESS--because that's a VERY logical conclusion....

 

A guy who is 18 is only one year older than a girl who is underage. The preferences of late adolescent men don't really tell us much because those same preferences may not apply to older men.

[shadowplay]

You can't because you don't have the CREDENTIALS which allow access to the study, which is a very important point i've been trying to make. You shouldn't be asserting the things you are because you lack the credentials to back them up. You'll have to take my word and the evidence of the posted abstract that it is VALID.

 

So if you have access to the full study with your "credentials" why don't you post some of it here so we can all be enlightened?

 

Surely you can't expect us to take everything one study finds as gospel based on just an abstract without seeing more details on how the research was conducted? Somebody with an "elementary knowledge" of statistics should know better.

 

Actually you're right, from now on all studies should just provide abstracts. Methods, etc. are just superfluous. An abstract alone is proof enough of validity. That would streamline the process for researchers nicely!

Edited October 5, 2009 by shadowplay

[shadowplay]

I've backed up EVERYTHING i've said so far, and if you want to say you're STILL doubting the validity after all the backing up i've done, I think that makes it VERY clear how you just don't want to give in to the fact that you're thoughts are wrong. Which is why you wasted so much time trying to talk about your hollywood examples, which have NO relevance if I can point to a study demonstrating perfectly clear to what men prefer.

 

Right, I'm just going to "take your word" for the fact that you've backed up your sources thoroughly. I don't need to see any convincing evidence of my own. Uh huh. Just like we should all take your word on your credentials.

 

Btw, if you're so concerned about copyright infringement why don't you pm me a copy of the paper instead of posting it on here.

Edited October 5, 2009 by shadowplay

[Paragon]

A guy who is 18 is only one year older than a girl who is underage. The preferences of late adolescent men don't really tell us much because those same preferences may not apply to older men.

 

What about men who are much older, such as 20+? And answer my question--when does this age difference become unhealthy? You're avoiding my questions It didnt say men who are 18 only, it gave a range. AT WHAT AGE DOES THE AGE DIFFERENCE BECOME UNHEALTHY?

 

Surely you can't expect us to take everything one study finds as gospel based on just an abstract without seeing more details on how the research was conducted? Somebody with an "elementary knowledge" of statistics should know better.

 

Actually you're right, from now on all studies should just provide abstracts. Methods, etc. are just superfluous. An abstract alone is proof enough of validity. That would streamline the process for researchers nicely!

 

Right, I'm just going to "take your word" for the fact that you've backed up your sources thoroughly. I don't need to see any convincing evidence of my own. Uh huh.

 

Copyright infringement. The material CANNOT be reproduced without consent, including PM. You can't just copy scholarly documents from databases and reproduce the media PM or not PM without breaking the law. Instead you sit here, first telling me how i'm wrong, THEN after I give you documentation proving my side, you say you doubt it I'm TIRED of playing into the fact of you wanting to play games and change your story. If i'm so wrong, PROVE IT. Or wait--you can't.

 

You never addressed my critique or your informal study, you never addressed the findings in the studies, no, you just expressed your DOUBT on them. You said you were annoyed about people who make generalizations about others based on THEIR own preferences, and I called you out on it saying that's what you and Jersey are doing. These are just a few of the statements I made that you ignored, because you have no way to address them other than say that you're wrong.

 

I could see if you were arguing over a noble cause, but you're not even doing that. You're arguing to DEFINE what's healthy and unhealthy to be attracted to, you're fighting to argue that someone who's attracted to a person who's younger than them is abnormal and has a screw or two loose. You tell me the positive ramifications of those statements, and how they're supposed to be constructive and HELP. They're NOT, so not only are you dedicating your time to TRY to be right when you're already WRONG, but you're fighting for a cause that will HURT more people than it will help since it quells understanding and promotes closemindedness. Quite noble of you, isn't it?

[shadowplay]

What about men who are much older, such as 20+? And answer my question--when does this age difference become unhealthy? You're avoiding my questions It didnt say men who are 18 only, it gave a range. AT WHAT AGE DOES THE AGE DIFFERENCE BECOME UNHEALTHY?

 

 

 

Copyright infringement. The material CANNOT be reproduced without consent, including PM. You can't just copy scholarly documents from databases and reproduce the media PM or not PM without breaking the law. Instead you sit here, first telling me how i'm wrong, THEN after I give you documentation proving my side, you say you doubt it I'm TIRED of playing into the fact of you wanting to play games and change your story. If i'm so wrong, PROVE IT. Or wait--you can't.

 

You never addressed my critique or your informal study, you never addressed the findings in the studies, no, you just expressed your DOUBT on them. You said you were annoyed about people who make generalizations about others based on THEIR own preferences, and I called you out on it saying that's what you and Jersey are doing. These are just a few of the statements I made that you ignored, because you have no way to address them other than say that you're wrong.

 

I could see if you were arguing over a noble cause, but you're not even doing that. You're arguing to DEFINE what's healthy and unhealthy to be attracted to, you're fighting to argue that someone who's attracted to a person who's younger than them is abnormal and has a screw or two loose. You tell me the positive ramifications of those statements, and how they're supposed to be constructive and HELP. They're NOT, so not only are you dedicating your time to TRY to be right when you're already WRONG, but you're fighting for a cause that will HURT more people than it will help since it quells understanding and promotes closemindedness. Quite noble of you, isn't it?

 

Aren't you the law-abiding citizen. So you won't pm me an excerpt on how the research was conducted, or at least a couple of paragraphs so I know you've actually read the thing? I applaud your principles! The truth is you don't have access to the journal either and we both know it. Stop bull****ting me. It's completely transparent.

 

Sorry, but without seeing the full study I have no way of verifying its validity. You really expect me to take it as gospel based on an abstract alone? That's ridiculous.

 

I never take a study seriously unless I've looked at the research methods. That's something I learned in elementary statistics, but apparently this concept eludes you.

 

"What about men who are much older, such as 20+?"

 

The problem is without reading more detail on the study, we have no way of knowing the median age of the participants, which is an important factor. It might be 20, it might be younger. At many universities participants come directly from psych 100 classes because students in these classes are required to participate in several studies for credit. Most psych 100 students are underclassmen, 18-19. But this is all just guessing. I can't really know without seeing the study, can I?

 

If we assume the median age is 20 considering university students generally range from 18 to 22, then I don't find it surprising that they would be most attracted to girls 16-18 since that's close to their own age.

 

Now how does this "prove" your generalization that most adult men (of all ages) are most sexually attracted to teenagers?

 

The other studies you referenced find that men are attracted to younger women, but they don't measure a median age that men are most attracted to. So how exactly do they support your argument?

 

It's possible the body of these studies includes this data, but I guess we'll never know, will we?

 

You get on my case for not having credentials or facts to back me up, but then you fail to provide the same. Instead you link to a few study abstracts with no methodological information attached and expect us to all bow down to your half-assed attempt at scholarly research. Not just that, but you expect us to "take [your] word" on your credentials and the fact that you thoroughly read and backed up the meat of the studies that you referenced.

 

"you're fighting to argue that someone who's attracted to a person who's younger than them is abnormal and has a screw or two loose."

 

Nope. I never said that being attracted to somebody younger implies psychological problems. I was more specific than that. I said that a full grown man, like the OP's bf, who finds underage women most attractive has a screw or two loose. This is different from a 35 year old man preferring women in their early twenties because women of that age are fully developed. It's also different from a 35 year old guy acknowledging the attractiveness of a mature looking sixteen year old girl. We're talking about adult men who actually prefer underage girls, girls who look underage. That's not normal, and you have yet to provide me with any evidence to prove otherwise.

 

"You said you were annoyed about people who make generalizations about others based on THEIR own preferences, and I called you out on it saying that's what you and Jersey are doing."

 

If my preferences had anything to do with this, I would argue that men don't naturally find younger women attractive, a point I'm not contending with. I would also argue that men are more into personalities than physical appearance because that's what I find more attractive in the opposite sex. Most people can make distinctions between their own preferences and what others like, something you clearly cannot do.

Edited October 5, 2009 by shadowplay