BF hit on a 15 year old (he's 35)

[kaylan]

I don't believe in do "x" and get punished. Consequences should always be the result of an action. You tell kids not to get passed out drunk not because you're going to ground them if they do but because it's bad for their liver and can be dangerous (especially for girls). You tell people no to text and drive not because they'll get a ticket but because they could cause an accident and maybe kill someone.

 

I would tell a young teen not to get involved with an adult because of physical issues, inability to relate, and the sort. Not because I was going to ground the teenager and then call the gestapo on the adult.

 

If a teenager is trying to date an older person it's because there's been a parental failure. All the police in the world won't be able to fix that.

You dont believe in do 'x' and get punished...but many do. Thats what rules and laws look like. There are consequences for everything. If there were no negative consequences for bad behavior, the world would be more upside down like the way it was years ago.

 

Sure kids shouldnt drink because its dangerous for their health, but that doesnt mean there arent consequences for their actions. How many more kids would be drinking in the street if we simply told them its only a health thing? Kids dont care about that kinda stuff at their age. They are more concerned with not "hearing it" from their parents.

 

You think people text less now because of accidents? No...because the law fines them now. Lets be real. Rules and laws work and are necessary. Knowing penalties exist keeps people in check.

 

I would of course tell a teenager not to get invovled with an adult because on the unequal and dangerous relationship...but how many kids are gonna listen to that? Be real. Youve been a teen...so you know without fear of repercussion many things go in one ear and out the other. Knowing that penalties exist is a big part of why any person obeys the rules set in place before them.

 

Police cant fix parental failure...but police can fix inappropriate adult behavior. It keeps wrong doers away from society, and rightfully so. THE ADULTS SHOULD KNOW BETTER. The kids are still growing and being taught. They shouldnt be influenced by ill mannered adults. Which is why adults who do wrong are rightfully in prison. Kids are so much more impressionable then adults.

[aj22one]

So when poor folks in Bangladesh die in a sweat shop fire making H&M clothes...thats ok because it was better quality of life than what they had before?

 

Doesnt matter that they are exploited and given crappy wages and poor working conditions that caused that fire huh?

 

When they die in the fire their employer is held responsible. The fact that they're not is due to the government in these underdeveloped countries exempt these employers from liability.

 

See, a free market makes employers a) be legally responsible for things they do badly and b) compete for the services of labor. Why do you think working conditions in Europe improved in the late Renaissance period? It was because you saw a weakening of governments and a strengthening of the merchants. OSHA wasn't around then, labor unions didn't exist.

 

Those crappy wages are light years ahead of what they were making before. And tomorrow those wages will be better. Unless of course governments get involved even more.

[kaylan]

Kaylan... I totally agree. A parent has to be proactive here, and not just provide punishment, but also teaching.

 

Kids will do stupid stuff from time to time... but I think you will find that the ones out there trying to get sexy with much older men have serious parental issues.

 

I guess the question is this: Is it acceptable for a 15yo girl to be sending sexual text messages to a 35yo guy? Is it OK for her to do that?

First off, did the OP tell us this girl initiated or responded to this guys texts?

 

And I dont think I ever insinuated that it was ok from a teenager to behave sexually toward an adult in any manner. So yes it would be wrong for a 15yo to sext a 35 yo. Male or female. My point was that an adult should know better than to engage a teenage kid in that sort of dialogue.

 

Given the fact that a teen is immature and hardly knows what from where yet in life, the adult definitely is seen more at fault. Which is why an adult is criminally charged for sexual behavior with youth

[aj22one]

You dont believe in do 'x' and get punished...but many do. Thats what rules and laws look like. There are consequences for everything. If there were no negative consequences for bad behavior, the world would be more upside down like the way it was years ago.

 

I don't even know where to begin here.

 

Sure kids shouldnt drink because its dangerous for their health, but that doesnt mean there arent consequences for their actions. How many more kids would be drinking in the street if we simply told them its only a health thing? Kids dont care about that kinda stuff at their age. They are more concerned with not "hearing it" from their parents.

 

You think people text less now because of accidents? No...because the law fines them now. Lets be real. Rules and laws work and are necessary. Knowing penalties exist keeps people in check.

 

Trust me, parental and legal rules and injunctions against teenage drinking do not prevent teens from drinking. It's kinda funny that you think they do.

 

No the law makes them text with their phones in their lap so the police can't see them. I'd rather have people who will text do so with the phone up near their line of vision so they can at least have one eye on the road.

 

And I like rules, rules that people follow voluntarily. Not rules that people follow because they're afraid the state will put a gun in their face.

 

I would of course tell a teenager not to get invovled with an adult because on the unequal and dangerous relationship...but how many kids are gonna listen to that? Be real. Youve been a teen...so you know without fear of repercussion many things go in one ear and out the other. Knowing that penalties exist is a big part of why any person obeys the rules set in place before them.

 

So teens who are told not to have sex until marriage (told by their church, family, school, friends) actually follow through on this? You sure about that?

 

 

Police cant fix parental failure...but police can fix inappropriate adult behavior. It keeps wrong doers away from society, and rightfully so. THE ADULTS SHOULD KNOW BETTER. The kids are still growing and being taught. They shouldnt be influenced by ill mannered adults. Which is why adults who do wrong are rightfully in prison. Kids are so much more impressionable then adults.

 

No, the police cannot fix adult behavior. All the police can do is put a gun in someone's face and put them in a box for some amount of time (a box that you as a taxpayer pay for by the way). The adult will get out and if they are indeed a predator the only effective protection is to educate our young people without threats of force against them.

[kaylan]

When they die in the fire their employer is held responsible. The fact that they're not is due to the government in these underdeveloped countries exempt these employers from liability.

Youre proving my point that those in power and with wealthy are exploiting the poor and preying on them.

 

See, a free market makes employers a) be legally responsible for things they do badly and b) compete for the services of labor. Why do you think working conditions in Europe improved in the late Renaissance period? It was because you saw a weakening of governments and a strengthening of the merchants. OSHA wasn't around then, labor unions didn't exist.

How does that disprove my point that those in power and with money willingly exploit the poor? How does that disprove my point that those who do such things have a responsibility to their common man.

 

Those crappy wages are light years ahead of what they were making before. And tomorrow those wages will be better. Unless of course governments get involved even more.

This isnt about whether the wages are better than what they had before...its about poor folks being exploited and being paid like crap while working in poor conditions all because the rich folk in power are selfish and see no reason to do better by them(the poor). They are willing exploiting them...that was my point.

 

Lets not stray away from the main topic.

 

Adults have the power, experience, and influence to do anything they want to the youth of the land. Thus is it their responsibility not to exploit them for their own selfish needs. Especially when its a possible detriment to the development of youth, be it mentally, emotionally, or physically.

[Untouchable_Fire]

First off, did the OP tell us this girl initiated or responded to this guys texts?

And I dont think I ever insinuated that it was ok from a teenager to behave sexually toward an adult in any manner. So yes it would be wrong for a 15yo to sext a 35 yo. Male or female. My point was that an adult should know better than to engage a teenage kid in that sort of dialogue.

Given the fact that a teen is immature and hardly knows what from where yet in life, the adult definitely is seen more at fault. Which is why an adult is criminally charged for sexual behavior with youth

 

I'm not sitting here trying to say this guy was right to sext with teenage girl. It's a very poor move on his part.

 

I'm saying they both did something wrong here.

[Mme. Chaucer]

The culpability of the teenager has no bearing at all on the culpability of the adult.

 

Sure, maybe if she behaved differently, these things would not happen to her, but that's to be addressed in a different conversation. Just like if I were walking down the "bad" street with a handful of money hanging out and a guy robbed me, I would have been stupid - but it does not change the nature of his crime.

 

49 thousand whatever - just keep in mind that the brains of teenagers are not fully wired up yet, so if you want to accept what one "agrees" to with that knowledge, that's on you. I am getting the feeling that you are personally sexually attracted to young teenagers. Is that true?

 

Society is messed up. We aggrandize and elevate the attributes of very young teenagers as the epitome of beauty and sexiness, but we don't allow them to function as fully sexualized adults (rightfully, IMO) or for adults to function with them that way (also rightfully).

 

We are generally extremely hypocritical when it comes to sex, here in the U S & A.

[aj22one]

Youre proving my point that those in power and with wealthy are exploiting the poor and preying on them.

 

Because of the government. Don't you see? The government is the problem not wealth.

 

 

How does that disprove my point that those in power and with money willingly exploit the poor? How does that disprove my point that those who do such things have a responsibility to their common man.

 

And where does the power come from? Not the businesses, they can't force you to work for them, they can't force you to buy their products. No my friend, the power comes from the state. And therein lies the problem. Get rid of the state and you have freedom and prosperity.

 

 

This isnt about whether the wages are better than what they had before...its about poor folks being exploited and being paid like crap while working in poor conditions all because the rich folk in power are selfish and see no reason to do better by them(the poor). They are willing exploiting them...that was my point.

 

The exploitation comes from the state.

 

Lets not stray away from the main topic.

 

Indeed, let's.

 

Adults have the power, experience, and influence to do anything they want to the youth of the land. Thus is it their responsibility not to exploit them for their own selfish needs. Especially when its a possible detriment to the development of youth, be it mentally, emotionally, or physically.

 

No they don't. Youths have the power to say no and parents have the power and the responsibility to stay involved in the lives of their children.

[fortyninethousand322]

49 thousand whatever - just keep in mind that the brains of teenagers are not fully wired up yet, so if you want to accept what one "agrees" to with that knowledge, that's on you. I am getting the feeling that you are personally sexually attracted to young teenagers. Is that true?

 

No, actually I'm very attracted to women a few years older than me (27-34 or so). I'm not defending the guy's actions at all. I don't think anyone should be sexting at all whether you're Brett Favre or the guy in this story. I just don't get the lynch mob mentality here.

[kaylan]

I don't even know where to begin here.

Good thing you didnt.

 

 

Trust me, parental and legal rules and injunctions against teenage drinking do not prevent teens from drinking. It's kinda funny that you think they do.

It doesnt prevent it completely, but it limits the number of kids doing so. If they were no legal rules in place, so many more kids would be out in the street drunk and acting a fool.

 

No the law makes them text with their phones in their lap so the police can't see them. I'd rather have people who will text do so with the phone up near their line of vision so they can at least have one eye on the road.

 

And I like rules, rules that people follow voluntarily. Not rules that people follow because they're afraid the state will put a gun in their face.

Some people text in their lap. Some people stop all together. My mom got 2 tickets for texting and talking on the phone while driving, and she doesnt do it at all anymore. So yes, the law works. It caused me to stop texting while driving to, because I def cant afford avoidable tickets.

 

And ok...you like rules people follow voluntarily. Well the world doesnt work that way. Laws need penalties for breaking them. Deterrence works. If there wasnt jail time for theft, or fines, how many more people would be stealing? Lets be real. Morals arent good enough to keep all people in check.

 

So teens who are told not to have sex until marriage (told by their church, family, school, friends) actually follow through on this? You sure about that?

Whos talking about sex before marraige? We are talking about sexual behavior with an adult.

 

My point was that penalties ensure people follow the rules fair more than a fairy tale honor system of morals. Quit being naive.

 

No, the police cannot fix adult behavior. All the police can do is put a gun in someone's face and put them in a box for some amount of time (a box that you as a taxpayer pay for by the way). The adult will get out and if they are indeed a predator the only effective protection is to educate our young people without threats of force against them.

The police cannot fix adult behavior? Last I check plenty of people get arrested for something and learn the error of their ways. Some folks are repeat offenders but some are not as well. Not everyone is a repeat offender when it comes to crime.

 

Your reasoning is ridiculously faulty. The only effective protection for youth is to educate them? So I guess we should educate youth and allow gang leaders, sexual predators, drug dealers, and thieves not be punished for their wrong doings? Because simply telling kids not to hang around them is enough huh?

 

Like I said before. Kids are IMPRESSIONABLE and STUBBORN. Without penalties for bad behavior, many of them will fall into those bad habits. Whats so hard to understand about this. Its not a fairy tale world. Deterrence by use of penalties works for more than simply telling someone something is bad for them and/or society.

[aj22one]

Whos talking about sex before marraige? We are talking about sexual behavior with an adult.

 

My point was that threatening children to not do certain behaviors doesn't always work.

 

 

Your reasoning is ridiculously faulty. The only effective protection for youth is to educate them? So I guess we should educate youth and allow gang leaders, sexual predators, drug dealers, and thieves not be punished for their wrong doings? Because simply telling kids not to hang around them is enough huh?

 

You cause harm to someone you pay the price, otherwise no. A thief replaces the damaged or stolen item. A murderer is punished as well. Gangs and drug dealers wouldn't exist in my world because if you wanted some pot or some coke you'd be going to 7-11 or CVS to buy perfectly legal recreational drugs instead of some streak corner or shady alleyway.

 

Like I said before. Kids are IMPRESSIONABLE and STUBBORN. Without penalties for bad behavior, many of them will fall into those bad habits. Whats so hard to understand about this. Its not a fairy tale world. Deterrence by use of penalties works for more than simply telling someone something is bad for them and/or society.

 

We have laws against murder, laws against theft. We have laws telling you you have to pay taxes, laws against drug use and so on and so on and so on. How are those working out?

[kaylan]

Because of the government. Don't you see? The government is the problem not wealth.

The government has the wealth and power.

 

Either way thats not my point. My point from the beginning is that those with power should not exploit the vulnerable. Adults have power. Kids are vulnerable. Simple.

 

And where does the power come from? Not the businesses, they can't force you to work for them, they can't force you to buy their products. No my friend, the power comes from the state. And therein lies the problem. Get rid of the state and you have freedom and prosperity.

Still not disproving my point. The government is still apart of the power structure that exploits the poor and vulnerable. Doesnt matter if its the business or government...they both have responsibilities. Let me state this YET AGAIN, those in power have a responsibility when it comes to the vulnerable and weak. They should not be exploiting them.

 

And lmao @ you thinking getting rid of the state means freedom and prosperity. Anarchy does not work. States exist for a reason. Without the state thered be so much more problems in the world. Even for all the wrongs some states commit.

 

The exploitation comes from the state.

It starts with the state, but it certainly is not only the state exploiting those poor people.

 

Indeed, let's.

 

No they don't. Youths have the power to say no and parents have the power and the responsibility to stay involved in the lives of their children.

You still arent getting my point. Adults could turn the world upside down on kids if they wanted to. We have the power. We control things. Simply saying no isnt on par with the power of experience and influence that we have.

 

Also like I keep saying. KIDS ARE EASILY IMPRESSIONABLE. Staying involved in their lives is of course great. But if we see an adult trying to take advantage of them, its our job to do something about that. Not sit idly by and thinking an immature human being will always know the right thing to do. Kids are in adult care for a reason...because they cannot do everything for themselves. Adults have responsibilties.

 

The fact that you are arguing this says a lot.

[kaylan]

My point was that threatening children to not do certain behaviors doesn't always work.

Ok, I agree it doesnt always work. But in does work some times, and with certain children it works much of the time.

 

The same thing with laws and penalties. They dont work all the time, but society would be in much worse shape without penalties.

You cause harm to someone you pay the price, otherwise no. A thief replaces the damaged or stolen item. A murderer is punished as well. Gangs and drug dealers wouldn't exist in my world because if you wanted some pot or some coke you'd be going to 7-11 or CVS to buy perfectly legal recreational drugs instead of some streak corner or shady alleyway.

In your perfect world. Haha. And you dont think its possible that the addiction rate for recreational drugs, as well as the fatality rate, wouldnt be twice what it is if you gave people a 7-11 Drug mart? Wow...back to reality please. Sure the government shouldnt baby everyone, but at the same time, it safe to say some pretty fvked up things would happen to society if all of a sudden you decided to make the worst and most addicting drugs legal.

 

Simply having to replace stolen merch is not gonna cause theft rates to drop. Itll cause them to sore. You think thieves are more afraid of fines or having to give up their own property, than they are of jail time? Come on now.

 

We have laws against murder, laws against theft. We have laws telling you you have to pay taxes, laws against drug use and so on and so on and so on. How are those working out?

Laws are not perfect, but they exist for a reason. You cannot compare drug laws and tax laws to those dealing with murder and theft.

 

The culpability of the teenager has no bearing at all on the culpability of the adult.

 

Sure, maybe if she behaved differently, these things would not happen to her, but that's to be addressed in a different conversation. Just like if I were walking down the "bad" street with a handful of money hanging out and a guy robbed me, I would have been stupid - but it does not change the nature of his crime.

 

49 thousand whatever - just keep in mind that the brains of teenagers are not fully wired up yet, so if you want to accept what one "agrees" to with that knowledge, that's on you. I am getting the feeling that you are personally sexually attracted to young teenagers. Is that true?

 

Society is messed up. We aggrandize and elevate the attributes of very young teenagers as the epitome of beauty and sexiness, but we don't allow them to function as fully sexualized adults (rightfully, IMO) or for adults to function with them that way (also rightfully).

 

We are generally extremely hypocritical when it comes to sex, here in the U S & A.

This.

 

This blame the victim mentality here is the same crap people(mainly dudes) try to pull on victims of rape. Its a mentality of the privileged. Doesnt matter if its sex, race, religion, class, or age. Some of those in power seem to have a hard time recognizing the power they have on society, or the responsibility they have to those who live without that power.

 

If someone does something bad, its the fault of the perp, and the perp alone. the victims dont control their actions. If someone sees a girl dressed like a hooker, walking down the block with a hand full of cash in one hand, and an Xbox in the other...Theyre still the one at fault if they rape and rob her. How the hell can they shift blame when she wasnt breaking the law or causing anyone harm?

Edited February 28, 2012 by kaylan

[aj22one]

Ok, I agree it doesnt always work. But in does work some times, and with certain children it works much of the time.

 

And those children end up learning that might makes right which is extremely destructive.

 

In your perfect world. Haha. And you dont think its possible that the addiction rate for recreational drugs, as well as the fatality rate, wouldnt be twice what it is if you gave people a 7-11 Drug mart? Wow...back to reality please. Sure the government shouldnt baby everyone, but at the same time, it safe to say some pretty fvked up things would happen to society if all of a sudden you decided to make the worst and most addicting drugs legal.

 

First of all you have to compare systems. Right now we have a system where we spend 40 billion a year to keep drugs off the street. What we've got is more drugs, more expensive drugs, and the government violating civil liberties. That doesn't work. At all.

 

On the other side we have the idea of a free market. Perhaps some people would be addicted to drugs but no more than coffee or alcohol now (both of which are legal). Most of the drug war is on marijuana. That's hardly going to result in massive addiction rates.

 

Which of these two systems is better?

 

Simply having to replace stolen merch is not gonna cause theft rates to drop. Itll cause them to sore. You think thieves are more afraid of fines or having to give up their own property, than they are of jail time? Come on now.

 

Technological advances will have some effect on theft as well, not just forfeiture of earnings. Car theft used to be a huge deal. Now with GPS and lowjacks and the like it's much less than it was years ago.

 

Laws are not perfect, but they exist for a reason. You cannot compare drug laws and tax laws to those dealing with murder and theft.

 

The point is that laws don't stop bad behavior they just punish.

[kaylan]

And those children end up learning that might makes right which is extremely destructive.

You need to proofread this sentence. I cant understand your point.

 

Either way, my point stands. Deterrence by threat of penalty works. Without this method society would be in an screwed up situation. And if parents didnt use this with their kids, some kids would run the house. Youve seen those Nanny shows right? Or episodes of talk shows that have bad teens of there?

 

When you simply tell a kid something is wrong and you do not threaten to punish or you dont follow through on punishments, many kids will see weakness and take advantage.

 

Same thing with people in society. If you show weakness, criminals will commit more crimes. Penalties are necessary.

First of all you have to compare systems. Right now we have a system where we spend 40 billion a year to keep drugs off the street. What we've got is more drugs, more expensive drugs, and the government violating civil liberties. That doesn't work. At all.

 

On the other side we have the idea of a free market. Perhaps some people would be addicted to drugs but no more than coffee or alcohol now (both of which are legal). Most of the drug war is on marijuana. That's hardly going to result in massive addiction rates.

 

Which of these two systems is better?

Im not arguing the drug war. Thats a totally different topic than whether the most harmful drugs should be legal. Two different issues.

 

You didnt answer my question. How is addiction rates and fatality rates go down if drugs are MORE EASILY accessible? Huh? You really know NOTHING about drugs if you think the addiction rates would be on par to coffee or alcohol. Its far easier to become addicted to certain harmful drugs than it is to get addicted to softer things like coffee or marijuana.

 

Technological advances will have some effect on theft as well, not just forfeiture of earnings. Car theft used to be a huge deal. Now with GPS and lowjacks and the like it's much less than it was years ago.

And with technological advances that stop crime, come technological advances that counteract them.

 

Laws are still one of the main things that stop crime.

 

The point is that laws don't stop bad behavior they just punish.

Bull. I have a friend that is South African, and shes told me that since Apartheid ended in that nation, the new police system has gotten incredibly weak and that punishments often dont happen for many crimes.

 

And guess what? South Africa is one of the worlds crime capitals. Poverty already perpetuates crime as it is, but when you add in a lack of law enforcement, the issue becomes damn bad.

 

When penalties are not enforced, crime sure as hell does rise. Laws work. Without laws in place this society would be the same rich white old boys club it used to be. Laws made it so women and ethnic minorities got a fair shake.

 

Lol @ you saying laws dont work. You really think society would be better behaved without them? Get outta here brah.

Edited February 28, 2012 by kaylan

[aj22one]

Lol @ you saying laws dont work. You really think society would be better behaved without them? Get outta here brah.

 

I think contracts work (they're sorta like laws) but no I don't think the government or the state works.

 

I used to be a minarchist. But then I met my gf who is trying to be a professor of political philosophy. After many conversations with her about society, the state, and the individual, I ran out of excuses for the existence of the state. There is literally nothing it does that can't done better and cheaper by the private sector.

 

Anyway, this is sorta off topic but that's my bit. I dislike violence and force. Coercion is always wrong whether it's done by people or the government.

[kaylan]

I think contracts work (they're sorta like laws) but no I don't think the government or the state works.

 

I used to be a minarchist. But then I met my gf who is trying to be a professor of political philosophy. After many conversations with her about society, the state, and the individual, I ran out of excuses for the existence of the state. There is literally nothing it does that can't done better and cheaper by the private sector.

 

Anyway, this is sorta off topic but that's my bit. I dislike violence and force. Coercion is always wrong whether it's done by people or the government.

Well this political discussion belongs elsewhere.

 

Crux of the matter is that the state and government is necessary imo. Its not perfect...but people arent perfect. Everyone is not good and honorable. So laws need to be set in place, and with laws we need law enforcement. Thats just how it is. People violate contracts too. Hence contract law.

 

If people could live and always dutifully carry out their obligations, and also never committed wrongs against society, than we wouldnt need the state. But thats not realistic to expect of people as a whole.

Edited February 28, 2012 by kaylan

[Nightsky]

Look, the world will NEVER run out of dirty old men. NEVER. If you want to protect your daughter/sister.... or whatever... Teach her to avoid bad situations. That removes the problem 99% of the time.

 

This is quoted for truth. She pretty much has to protect herself sooner or later or she'll spend her life being taken advantage of. You can't just hurt/kill every guy she sacrifices herself too.

 

I think the laws only get rid of the less predatory men. The most predetory men could care less if 18 or 17 or what ever is the age of consent.

 

15 year old girls can and do look hot. I really hate how some men pertend a 15 year old couldn't possibly be attracted but some how at some magic age 18, 21, what ever women sudenly get attractive.

 

49 thousand whatever - just keep in mind that the brains of teenagers are not fully wired up yet, so if you want to accept what one "agrees" to with that knowledge, that's on you. I am getting the feeling that you are personally sexually attracted to young teenagers. Is that true?

 

 

Most men are sexualy attracted to teenagers. A 15 year old can be just as sexy as a 18,19 year old.

 

I personaly don't want to deal with prison time so I'll follow the law. A man who is reckless about this kind of thing is probably reckless about a great many things and not some one many people would want to date.

[mickleb]

Team kaylan.

[ascendotum]

This is quoted for truth. She pretty much has to protect herself sooner or later or she'll spend her life being taken advantage of. You can't just hurt/kill every guy she sacrifices herself too.

A few people here have talked about the men in her life doing a better job protecting her, but I'll tell you many teenage girls are very private about their personal life or even rebellious. They dont want mommy + daddy interfering in their personal lives anymore.

 

15 year old girls can and do look hot. I really hate how some men pertend a 15 year old couldn't possibly be attracted but some how at some magic age 18, 21, what ever women sudenly get attractive. Most men are sexualy attracted to teenagers. A 15 year old can be just as sexy as a 18,19 year old.

Anyone heard of Ruby Rubacuore, the girl at the centre of the italian sex scandal. She's gorgeous and its possible for there to be as little as 13 mths difference between the girl in this post (though some pics of her now will be her at 18). The Italian prime minister used to host bunga bunga parties (I get the impression they were like 'eyes wide shut' parties), and she was one of the girls. She was no naive, gullible easily manipulated girl, she's got $$$, a lot of media exposure for her new career as an entertainer. There was a huge shytstorm in the US over Clinton, getting a bj, while in Italy they dont care if their PM hosts orgies or has mistresses, as long as he does a good job running the country (which he didnt). 17yr old Ruby got it to the front page though.

 

I know a few women who get hugely up in arms over older men seeing any sort of sexual beauty in teenage girls, but who have a meh attitude when it comes to women's magazines using underage girls in suggestive poses for fashion shoots. They also dont seem to get too worried over increased sexualisation of society and tweens by the media, which I don't quite like, and I wonder what it will be like in 20 yrs time.

 

I personaly don't want to deal with prison time so I'll follow the law. A man who is reckless about this kind of thing is probably reckless about a great many things and not some one many people would want to date.

I agree. I'm certainly not supporting what this guy did when drunk, but some of the posts her are over the top in assuming this guy's a child molester. Edited February 28, 2012 by ascendotum

[Nightsky]

I know a few women who get hugely up in arms over older men seeing any sort of sexual beauty in teenage girls, but who have a meh attitude when it comes to women's magazines using underage girls in suggestive poses for fashion shoots. They also dont seem to get too worried over increased sexualisation of society and tweens by the media, which I don't quite like, and I wonder what it will be like in 20 yrs time.

 

Yes all these young models used to sell clothing etc are often times underaged teens. This sex apeal is used to sell to women who like thin youthful look. They should boycott these companies and products if they feel the way they do. Of course that will not happen.

 

I agree. I'm certainly not supporting what this guy did when drunk' date=' but some of the posts her are over the top in assuming this guy's a child molester. [/quote']

 

I don't know what the guy did. The op was never clear. The OP said sexting but I'm not clear on if that meant they exchanged nude or sugestive photos or if that just mean he called her sexy while drunk and trying to txt his ex. What the fck is an exgf's new bf's 15 year old doing txting back and forth with her fathers phone. It's all so strange and makes no sense.

 

Many women are just blind to this type of thing.

[snug.bunny]

I would argue that in a consensual sexual encounter... there is no offender from a "moral standpoint".

 

Well, I argue that a 15-year-old is not in the same mindset as a 35-year-old and a 35-year-old should not be coming onto someone that age who is so much younger.

 

You seem to view a 15-year-old as "consensual" from a psychological standpoint to that of a 35-year-old adult. I don't. Being a teenager can be and often is an extremely confusing period, and to have outside interference from that of someone who is much, much older, is not something I would consider "healthy" and/or in the best interest of a teenager.

 

So, who is the 35-year-old really looking out for? The teenager, or his penis?

 

You tell me..

[wuggle]

Well, I argue that a 15-year-old is not in the same mindset as a 35-year-old and a 35-year-old should not be coming onto someone that age who is so much younger.

 

You seem to view a 15-year-old as "consensual" from a psychological standpoint to that of a 35-year-old adult. I don't. Being a teenager can be and often is an extremely confusing period, and to have outside interference from that of someone who is much, much older, is not something I would consider "healthy" and/or in the best interest of a teenager.

 

So, who is the 35-year-old really looking out for? The teenager, or his penis?

 

You tell me..

 

Agreed, whilst some on this board judge that as the girl is 15 it is consensual and therefore ok. I would argue that whilst 15 may be considered "physically" old enough, it certainly isn't mentally old enough. As a society we try to protect our youth by setting certain age limits on sexual behaviour, so whilst 15 may in 'biological' terms be 'old enough' in a civilised society it is not.

 

At best a 35 year old trying to f*ck a 15 year old could be described as having no control over his basest instincts and totally uncivilised.

 

besides, what would they talk about afterwards

[kaylan]

This is quoted for truth. She pretty much has to protect herself sooner or later or she'll spend her life being taken advantage of. You can't just hurt/kill every guy she sacrifices herself too.

 

I think the laws only get rid of the less predatory men. The most predetory men could care less if 18 or 17 or what ever is the age of consent.

 

15 year old girls can and do look hot. I really hate how some men pertend a 15 year old couldn't possibly be attracted but some how at some magic age 18, 21, what ever women sudenly get attractive.

You are missing the point. Its not about looks. Its about the mind.

 

Men and women here can agree that some teenagers look damn good despite their age. But us adults who dont wanna use youngsters for sex would steer clear. Im sure women can admit Taylor Lautner had a hot body even though he was 16 when the Twilight Saga started. The same way guys had been fawning over Britney Spears back when she was under 18.

 

Its one thing to acknowledge they are sexually attractive. Its another thing to act on it. We arent gonna sit here and lie and say that those who are sexually maturing arent attractive at all, but we will say that they still do not have the mentality of an adult...hence why people call them kids.

 

 

Most men are sexualy attracted to teenagers. A 15 year old can be just as sexy as a 18,19 year old.

 

I personaly don't want to deal with prison time so I'll follow the law. A man who is reckless about this kind of thing is probably reckless about a great many things and not some one many people would want to date.

Some men actually dont wanna abuse their power by exploiting young women for their sexual gain. Some dudes have morals about this sort of thing.

 

They are kids. Plain and simple.

 

Heres a story. I was 24 over the summer and met a girl near the bar. She was waiting for a friend to bring her a fake ID to get in. She told me she was going into senior year at Boston College and wasnt 21 yet. So I talked to the bouncer and got him to let her in since hes cool with me and that was a bar I frequented.

 

We hung out during the night and stuff...she seemed alright, but just tad too immature. We chilled, kissed a little and then went outside. I ended up meeting some of her friends outside later and a couple of them seemed rather young. She ends up telling me shes a senior in high school about to go to Boston College. Aka 17 and about to turn 18. And I put on the breaks right there.

 

Why you ask. Because while she did look older and was technically legal...I have no interest in girls I see as kids. 20 was a stretch for me at that time as most chicks under 21 I find to be very immature. So to find out she was actually about to be 18 made me feel like I was taking candy from a baby. Personally I like a chick who is on my level. What can some chick whos 7 years younger than me, have in common with me?

 

17 was long ago for me and I remember being as immature as she was at that age. I could walk circles around her if I wanted to but that wasnt my goal. Im not trying to take advantage of the naivety of younger people.

 

Its about the mental dude, not the physical. I acknowledge their physical maturity, but without the mental maturity....its all unequal and not fair to the younger folk.

 

Yes all these young models used to sell clothing etc are often times underaged teens. This sex apeal is used to sell to women who like thin youthful look. They should boycott these companies and products if they feel the way they do. Of course that will not happen.

 

Their appeal is created by men who control that industry. Those in power create the sexual standard and use that to influence the rest of us.

 

Its rather simple. Its why black men and asian women got fetishized over the years. Simple look at tv and movies. A lot of the time when I see interracial couples its a brother or an asian gal as the other party.

Edited February 28, 2012 by kaylan

[snug.bunny]

besides, what would they talk about afterwards

 

Exactly... Probably something along the lines of Beiber's hairdue and chicken mcnuggets.