Homosexual group 'YES' encourages 13 year olds to express themselves

[MODU]

Are you endorsing pedophilia?

No, not in that post.  Nothing in there referred to the age of the 13 year old's sex partners.  I was presuming them to be, most likely, within a few years of the youths in question, perhaps even exact contemporaries.

Pedophilia is not limited to just adults having sexual desires towards kids.  Pedophilia is the desire of people (that is both adults and minors) to have sex with adolescents. 

Wrong. Desire to have sex with adolescents is called Ephebophilia.

Both are similar since it deals with attractions, but Ephebophilia is the sexual attraction dependancy of an adult with adolescents (this is probably where Michael Jackson falls in) though sex is not necessarily involved.  Pedophilia is the desire of anyone to actually have sex with kids.  From Answers.com:

Ephebophilia, as most strictly defined, refers only to an attraction, not to sexual activity (although sexual activity can be involved). It is used in contrast with pedophilia, which is an attraction to pre-pubescent individuals. In more casual usage, however, pedophilia is often used more broadly in the western world, to describe an attraction to any person younger than the legal age of consent. For example, the term "pedophile priests" is frequently used in the context of the Roman Catholic Church sex abuse scandal, although much of the sexual behavior involved was with adolescent (i.e. post-pubescent) teens.

The nature of ephebophilia is not fully understood, and a variety of perspectives are held. Some regard ephebophilia as merely a milder form of pedophilia, in which the object of attraction is closer to what is "normal" than with a true pedophile. According to one theory, ephebophilia is a chronophilia, i.e. a paraphilia in which the paraphile's sexual/erotic age is discordant with his or her actual chronological age, and is instead concordant with the age of the partner.

[Max Power]

All homosexual groups and literary content and publications of that nature should be  banned from our schools.  I'll let the adults do what they want for the most part, but I won't tolerate them spreading their filth among our kids.

What the hell has gotten into you? If you honestly believe a thing you just said, may God have mercy on your soul.

YOU CANT HAVE 13 YEAR OLDS PRACTICING HOMOSEXUAL SEX.

Or any type of sex. You are one dumb bitch if you think heterosexual sex is better than homosexual sex for a 13 year-old.

[KillerPollo]

Are you endorsing pedophilia?

No, not in that post.  Nothing in there referred to the age of the 13 year old's sex partners.  I was presuming them to be, most likely, within a few years of the youths in question, perhaps even exact contemporaries.

Pedophilia is not limited to just adults having sexual desires towards kids.  Pedophilia is the desire of people (that is both adults and minors) to have sex with adolescents. 

Wrong. Desire to have sex with adolescents is called Ephebophilia.

Both are similar since it deals with attractions, but Ephebophilia is the sexual attraction dependancy of an adult with adolescents (this is probably where Michael Jackson falls in) though sex is not necessarily involved.  Pedophilia is the desire of anyone to actually have sex with kids.  From Answers.com:

Ephebophilia, as most strictly defined, refers only to an attraction, not to sexual activity (although sexual activity can be involved). It is used in contrast with pedophilia, which is an attraction to pre-pubescent individuals. In more casual usage, however, pedophilia is often used more broadly in the western world, to describe an attraction to any person younger than the legal age of consent. For example, the term "pedophile priests" is frequently used in the context of the Roman Catholic Church sex abuse scandal, although much of the sexual behavior involved was with adolescent (i.e. post-pubescent) teens.

The nature of ephebophilia is not fully understood, and a variety of perspectives are held. Some regard ephebophilia as merely a milder form of pedophilia, in which the object of attraction is closer to what is "normal" than with a true pedophile. According to one theory, ephebophilia is a chronophilia, i.e. a paraphilia in which the paraphile's sexual/erotic age is discordant with his or her actual chronological age, and is instead concordant with the age of the partner.

I'm attracted to (Asian, expecially Japanese) girls aged 15-22.

[MaC]

Because fags can't reproduce naturally, they resort to recruiting children. Fags can be heard chanting "TEN PERCENT IS NOT ENOUGH, RECRUIT, RECRUIT, RECRUIT" in their fag parades. A group called the "Lesbian Avengers" prides itself on trying to recruit young girls. They print "WE RECRUIT" on their literature. Some other fags aren't as overt about this, but rather try to infiltrate society and get into positions where they will have access to the malleable minds of young children (e.g., the clergy, teachers, Boy Scout leaders, etc.)

Please, for the love of God, do not ban him.  These posts are comedic gems that bring laughter to my day.

[MaC]

I'm attracted to (Asian, expecially Japanese) girls aged 15-22.

15 year old girls-and you're 20?  Sick dude, just sick.

[afleitch]

I'm attracted to (Asian, expecially Japanese) girls aged 15-22.

15 year old girls-and you're 20?  Sick dude, just sick.

Oh he know's he's sick but he deflects attention from his own misdemenours by attacking gay people. Just like a womanising televangelist preacher!

[Platypus]

btw, this should make you happy, preston.

i thought it was quite interesting, actually. It's about the 'degayification' of american media.

[opebo]

I'm attracted to (Asian, expecially Japanese) girls aged 15-22.

15 year old girls-and you're 20?  Sick dude, just sick.

That's not sick, Golberz, though your prudery is.  There is nothing more normal than a 20 year old male being attracted to a post-pubescent female - for that matter a 50 year old male.

Do you you think that old people's tastes automatically change as they get older?  No, what is most attractive - instinctively - is always youth.  You might as well claim that fat people start finding their fellow fats attractive as they get fatter.

[KillerPollo]

I'm attracted to (Asian, expecially Japanese) girls aged 15-22.

15 year old girls-and you're 20?  Sick dude, just sick.

That's not sick, Golberz, though your prudery is.  There is nothing more normal than a 20 year old male being attracted to a post-pubescent female - for that matter a 50 year old male.

Do you you think that old people's tastes automatically change as they get older?  No, what is most attractive - instinctively - is always youth.  You might as well claim that fat people start finding their fellow fats attractive as they get fatter.

for once, I agree with you. Look, That time interval is OK for my age!

By the time I'm 30, it'll change to 25-32! Does that sound more wholesome? It's still the same age difference.

I wouldn't mind having a 15-year old Japanese girlfriend.

[Jens]

I don't care for the way you insult the Victorians.

Those prudish, unrealistic Victorians produced one of the most vital and intellectually lively periods in Western Civilization. And a great deal of that vitality arose from the fact that Victorians invested serious energy into endeavors other than sex.

That was until, of course, the moral code all broke down by the 1890s, thanks to frauds like Sigmund Freud.

THe vitality of the English society was much more founded on the 18th century's elimination of religious restictions - The moral and sexual imhibitants of the 19th century is a reaction from the conservative middle class towards the rapidly changing society especially the enormous immigration to the cities. The people who supported this Victorian sexual code most certainly wasn't the same as those who where building the British Empire on the frontiers. They worked as administraters of the already establised.

Hmm, where to start a response?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

First: Yes, all civilized countries experienced an increase in secularism in the 18th century, due to stifling influence of French culture then. BUT that secularization reached only a limited extent in Britain (and particularly the US colonies), because there existed a mass of people who hated any trend emanating from the continent. Heck, a whole new religious movement called Methodism was born in England at the same time Rousseau and Voltaire were busy destroying Christian culture in France.

The secularization that did take place, among the upper classes, came to a sorry end during and after the Regency, when the effiminacy of George IV, and the slovenliness of his successor, sort of forced Victoria to adopt a more proper tone in Buckingham to rehabilitate the crown's reputation. Had she spread her legs as wide open as George IV did his, Britain would have become a republic in 1848.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Second: Far more than simply "middle class religious conservatives" participated in the revival that took place between 1840 and the 1880s or so. I already mentioned on some ancient post the intense sectarian nature of British politics then. Yes, conservatives supported the established Anglican church. But Liberals just as strongly supported the "Nonconformist" churches, while the Labour party began among Unitarians and Congregationalists. And, with the exception of the Unitarians, the churches all supported a sexual propriety -- they would have lost their congregations and faced vicious broadsheet campaigns had they not.

You know, in Charles Dickens's short story "A Christmas Carol", the two men who stop Scrooge and ask him to donate to "relieve the sufferings of the poor" in the prisons and workhouses? Those two were Liberal evangelicals!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Third: So, exactly what was David Livingstone doing among the Baganda tribe in the middle of Uganda, so far removed from contact that a newspaper reporter had to "fetch" him?

A great deal of British colonialism arose from, well, missionaries like Livingstone spreading Christian faith to "heathens" in wilds so inaccesible that railroads, telegraph stations, and canals had to be built, not to facilitate trade among the heathans, or even to extract minerals, but merely to connect the missions to whatever ocean port that lay nearby.

But the wheels fell of to all of this, beginning with Gladstone's disestablishment of the Anglican church in Ireland, and the rapacious nature of colonialism in the 1880s thanks to moral cretins like Joseph Chamberlain and Cecil Rhodes.

First of all, I do not consider religion a the foundation of the Victorian inhibited sexual moral codex, more a spin off. The British colonial adventures were spectacular but in no way desicive towards creating the industrialised Britain. Nor do I see any difference between Liberals and Conservatives when I talk about conservative middle class. The British economical succes was build on innovasiveness and trade, not on sexual abstiness. The Victorian idea of sexuality, or lack of it, came from a group of people in the British society that benefitted from the economical progress, including voting rights, but who were not part of the driving forces that created the industrialised British society. Later on, the "movement" gattered support among many other groups in the society, but claiming that sexual abstinens were the driving force of the British Empire is saying that the end result caused the beginning and not as it should be the beginning and the event inbetween causing the end result.

[MaC]

I'm attracted to (Asian, expecially Japanese) girls aged 15-22.

15 year old girls-and you're 20?  Sick dude, just sick.

That's not sick, Golberz, though your prudery is.  There is nothing more normal than a 20 year old male being attracted to a post-pubescent female - for that matter a 50 year old male.

Do you you think that old people's tastes automatically change as they get older?  No, what is most attractive - instinctively - is always youth.  You might as well claim that fat people start finding their fellow fats attractive as they get fatter.

I'm probably one of the lesser prudish people on this forum, even less so than you since you advocate Christian murder.  However, let's not go there in that it's an entirely different topic in itself.  As for you and Killerpollo, there's a certain age limit on where a hot woman actually looks like a woman.  Sure there may be more ambiguity nowadays since it's often the case that 15 year olds look like sluts.  However, the distinction is that they look like a woman and not a child, or a child that's becoming a woman.  Yes, a 20 year old hottie is going to be the same to a 15 year old as it is to a 50 year old.  However a 15 year old girl is going to have pubescent qualities that should only be attractive to the 15 year old.  Sure she may exhibit some overall attractive qualities, yet it shouldn't be enough for a 50 year old to want to fornicate her.  As for the topic, 13 year old should not be encouraged to have sex, homosexual or otherwise.  It's already too burdensome to go around in society and still keep an amount of innocence, but to encourage the behavior is bad within itself.  The only thing is (as I believe it was previously mentioned) is that parents get too weirded out by any responsibility so they let the public schools brainwash their kids and hope that they turn out okay.  I mean, why is it for a dad to take his kid on a three hour fishing trip on a Saturday afternoon and try to explain things.  Yes, it's uncomfortable, but it needs to be done.  As for homosexuality, it should be neither encouraged nor discouraged among kids.  As for teens it seems to be a trend that some grow out of.  And as far as KillerPollo would want to push his son to not be gay, there'd be a kind of resentment that the kid would either become even more gay or make him hate his father because he's a prude.

[opebo]

there's a certain age limit on where a hot woman actually looks like a woman.  Sure there may be more ambiguity nowadays since it's often the case that 15 year olds look like sluts.

You judgemental, misogynisic prude!  I like sluts, though I don't like the term as it implies something negative about them.  Your double standard and misogyny is disgusting.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not really.  Some 15 year olds look older than some 20 year olds.  It all depends on race, body type, and developement.  My point would be that at 15 most girls have gone through puberty, and are pregnable.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why 'should' these qualities be attractive only to another 15 year old?  You're just describing your own subjective perferences.  They bear little relation to anyone else's. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If anything, the 50 year old will probably be even more attracted to her than the 15 year old due to the sad taboo our society places on such normal interactions.  But one thing is for sure, even if your taste runs more to 20 year olds than 15 year olds, the last thing a 50 year old man is going to want is a 50 year old woman.  Btw, your use of the term 'fornicate' is prudish and implies a religious hatred of sex.

[MaC]

  Btw, your use of the term 'fornicate' is prudish and implies a religious hatred of sex.

Well, I would say "" but the moderators seem to not like that, so I'm respecting their wishes.

So what's your subjective standard opebo? Should ten year olds be encouraged to have sex? It is "great to hit 'em before their eight"?  How about 5?  Hell why not even get some three year olds?  They fully understand the implications of sex.  They know that at that age it's not weird.

[opebo]

So what's your subjective standard opebo? Should ten year olds be encouraged to have sex? It is "great to hit 'em before their eight"?  How about 5?  Hell why not even get some three year olds?  They fully understand the implications of sex.  They know that at that age it's not weird.

My subjective preference is - they start to look attractive to me somewhere in the 14-16 age range.  Of course this has no bearing on my actions, as I avoid any serious infractions of the law. 

As for any younger ages than that - I really can't say what is in other's minds or loins.  Perhaps they are interested in sex, I've no idea.  In any case I will concede that State intervention is appropriate in preventing people being coerced to have sex.  And certainly the younger the person, the more difficult it is to determine whether they actually consented or merely fear the authority-figure involved (usually a parent). 

I suppose I am for a more fluid standard, in which people are assumed to have the ability to consent unless it can be demonstrated that circumstances make their consent dubious.  For example if a 12 year old sneaks out her window at night to have relations with some good looking ne'er-do-well 25 year old - well that is clearly consent, and the chap, however seedy, has no coercive power.  If however a parent, gaurdian, step-parent, or any other care-giver and authority figure pressures a young person for sex, and implies either a threat of physical violence or withdrawal of affection or support, then that is clearly coercive. 

[MaC]

okay, I've always have wondered where your line was.