19 February 2020

No Rational Way To Say Some Things

There's things you can't say without sounding sexist, even if it's arguably true.

There's things you can't say without sounding racist, even if it's arguably true.

There's things you can't say without sounding homophobic, even if it's arguably true.

There's things you can't say without sounding antisemitic, even if it's arguably true.

There's things you can't say without sounding like a pederast, even if it's arguably true.

It's that last one that's going to be sticking under my skin.

I've got... not really friends... but more than acquaintances who have been raging about some 19 year old in a sexual relationship with a 13 year old.  It made the local news... or Facebook...  I don't know where they heard about it and I've only heard about this particular case from them.

But a 19 year old having sex with a 13 year old is WRONG!


Then their 13 year old daughter comes home with her 13 year old boyfriend.

"Is it OK for him to fuck her?" I ask.

The kids have a BUSTED look now and the not-friend replies, "why wouldn't it be OK?  They're the same age."  Kids now look relieved.

So, your objection isn't that she's not old enough to fuck, it's that the 19 year old is too old for her?


You're OK with 13 year olds fucking, we've established that.  Why is a zero year age difference OK and a six year age difference wrong?

Is it OK for a 60 year old to be banging a 19 year old?  That's an even bigger difference.

"Well, those are both adults!"

OK, so it's it's fine for kids to fuck as long as they only fuck other kids?

"That's not what I mean!"

That's because you're not even examining the assumptions.

"So you want to fuck my daughter?"  (I have no idea where that one came from).

In five years, sure; not now.

"Why not now?  Isn't she pretty enough?"

She's very pretty.  But our society has deemed her a child and I am a member of that society, therefore, no screwing children.

(Note, in 1850 she'd be fair game and prime marrying age.)
(Also note: in several dalliances while in my late 20's with 18 and 19 year old college girls I discovered that I want some mileage on the person I share a bed, sooner or later you're going to have to talk to them and youngin's just don't have anything worth saying most of the time!)

Back to my original point.  Her fucking him is OK.  What if he's 14? (He turns 14 in a couple weeks.)

"That's fine..."

What about 15?  Sixteen?  Seventeen?

What's the magic number?

She's still a child until 18 and he's going to turn 18 before her.  Is child of 17 OK to get it on with man of 18?

"Uh..." (kids look nervous again).

The truth be told, Western Civ is WAY too hung up on sex.

We're also fucked in the head about the transition from child to adult.

We puritanically forbid children to make a slow entry into adulthood then slam them into it at a magical chronological date; ready or not!

At the same time we don't keep our adolescents from seeing anything and everything about being an adult, we just say, "forbidden!  Wait until you're 18 (or 21)!"

We refuse to account for sexual maturity not conforming to our chronological mile-markers.

Likewise we refuse to admit that many people who've passed those marks aren't really ready to be adults yet.

No wonder they're confused when the teacher hits on them.

We're not preparing them, and in many ways we're not allowed to teach them.


  1. We also are incredibly inconsistent about when a person is a child and when an adult. We've tried twelve-year-olds in adult-level court (admittedly, this was for some pretty horrific crimes) and given them adult-level sentences. At the same time, in some states seventeen is old enough to drive, but too young to have s-x. And we freak out worse about "underage" sex than we do about anything short of murder.

  2. My own opinion is that if the sex was consensual and the parties are of equivalent age, it shouldn't be prosecuted at the level of a felony, but misdemeanor only. In cases where there is a disparity in age I likewise think that it should be prosecuted at the misdemeanor level, but that in the case of schoolteacher/student the schoolteacher should lose his/her teaching certificate and no new one issued. In short, no felony level crime for consensual intercourse/sexual contact. Felony should be limited to legitimate malum in se sexual assault/rape.

    1. I'm of the mind that if they're old enough to consent, they're old enough to decide for themselves whom; even if there's a large disparity.

      Something we've chucked out with the bathwater is societal punishments for not adhering to social norms. How many times have you heard something to the effect of, "if it was wrong, it would be illegal"?

    2. Even if it's consensual a position of authority creates doubt about the consent being coerced.

      It'd be different if sex couldn't be used as a social weapon or if sex was as casual as we sometimes pretend.


You are a guest here when you comment. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: Sign your work.

Anonymous comments must pass a higher bar than others.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.