Section 8 housing of the Internet
Bowie article pissed me off....
- Thread starter SNIDELY WHIPLASH
- Start date
M
member 1013
Guest
go on
1
1372
Guest
M
member 1013
Guest
I'm 15 any one wanna boink me
Nah, but I can hook you up with a Burmese friend who will stick his dick anywhere. Mr Hmong is his nickname.
1
1372
Guest
I can only imagine he calls himself that after a perennial contender examination from @Splinty
Dude drives a ...
Never mind.
Dude's a fucking demon at checkers but his Thai is shit even after being here 20+ years. People learn differently.
My thoughts on AOC and then Bowie in particular:
The general AOC in the western world is about 16. In a few US states it is 17 or 18, in a couple of other countries it is lower. Everyone has their own idea but there is a reasonable argument for 16, so that's what I'll use as a benchmark.
If 16 is the AOC, that is, IMHO, implying that most/all people are mature enough to consent to sex by their 16th birthday. As different people mature at different rates, it is reasonable to assume that some people are mature enough to consent to sex just before their 16th birthday. Just how much before is specific to the maturity level of the individual.
HOWEVER, by choosing 16 as the AOC, we are saying that some people need protecting until that point. Without knowing for sure if a person is mature enough for sex, you are risking taking advantage of someone if you have sex with them before they are 16 and that would make you a predator.
David Bowie was a predator in this case. Whether or not this girl was ready for sex at the age of 15, he was risking harming her.
I'm also not convinced that she is able to objectively judge that she was negatively unaffected by the situation. We often hear phrases like, "My parents beat me as a kid and it never did me any harm," from people who beat their kids. If nothing else, it has given her the opinion that in some cases it is acceptable for 30 year old men to have sex 15 year olds.
The general AOC in the western world is about 16. In a few US states it is 17 or 18, in a couple of other countries it is lower. Everyone has their own idea but there is a reasonable argument for 16, so that's what I'll use as a benchmark.
If 16 is the AOC, that is, IMHO, implying that most/all people are mature enough to consent to sex by their 16th birthday. As different people mature at different rates, it is reasonable to assume that some people are mature enough to consent to sex just before their 16th birthday. Just how much before is specific to the maturity level of the individual.
HOWEVER, by choosing 16 as the AOC, we are saying that some people need protecting until that point. Without knowing for sure if a person is mature enough for sex, you are risking taking advantage of someone if you have sex with them before they are 16 and that would make you a predator.
David Bowie was a predator in this case. Whether or not this girl was ready for sex at the age of 15, he was risking harming her.
I'm also not convinced that she is able to objectively judge that she was negatively unaffected by the situation. We often hear phrases like, "My parents beat me as a kid and it never did me any harm," from people who beat their kids. If nothing else, it has given her the opinion that in some cases it is acceptable for 30 year old men to have sex 15 year olds.
1
1372
Guest
Sort of agree.
But if she was my daughter I would bath her every night.
^^^^^JUST MESSING AND I SWEAR I PROMISE.
I will explain what I mean about biology not being the primary determinant of our lives in another thread as it's a much larger conversation worthy of some breathing room.
The one thing I'll say to the rest of your comment above is that the performance of one's life vs. The reality of one's life are often at odds. When you are known as "most desired groupie to the stars" for your 15 minutes of fame and that fame is validated, if you are screwed up you're not going to be able to admit it lest the gravy train of interest run out. Or there's the chance you just may not know. Or there's the chance that you're actually fine and not "performing" at all. It's like the fantasy of the stripper, porn star or prostitute who really does just enjoy sex a great deal and does it for that reason, not because something went at least slightly awry in life (or is currently, i.e. addiction). While the prevalence of actual sexual abuse is typically overstated, there is a strong correlation between having sex early in life. To boil it down: when intimacy becomes performative, it skews the needs intimacy is meant to fulfill.
Regarding my last statement I think you should reread it because we didn't disagree unless I'm misunderstanding.
1
1031
Guest
True, my bad.
That's quite an interesting take you have on things there. But to be totally blunt, it's so interesting that I'm still not sure what you mean by the performance of one's life vs. the reality. I understand the performance of my life to be the reality. Please explain that one again.
If you mean that people like to pretend then, well jesus, people pretend at a lot of things in life. People pretend their big time when they're small time, people pretend to victims when they're bullies. People pretend to be tolerant when they're only tolerant of their own views.
When we talk about a correlation between sex at an early age and sexual abuse (IF I understand what you're saying) is, at least to me, like the steroids issue, or the issue with gun crime, people want to blame one thing instead of every contributing aspect of a phenomenon.
In terms of intimacy, or sexual intimacy, I get what you're saying but who's to say that your opinion on what everyone's sexual intimacy needs are and how to fulfill them? I don't mean that to be confrontational but it just seems like an impossible thing to try and contain or define for anyone but one's self.
Thank you to the mods for their work on this one.
I don't think you're being confrontational at all. This is actually a pretty decent discussion. I honestly hate threads where everyone agrees early and then spends the rest of the time giving each other hand jobs. Better to share these perspectives and come to better understanding if not accord.
I wasn't making a correlation between sexual abuse and sex at an early age. I was making a correlation between sex at an early age and sex work. This is fairly well researched and available in a number of studies on people active in porn, stripping and prostitution. Usually abuse of any kind is the best predictor of future sex work, but it typically goes along with early sexual exposure. See studies here: Associations between childhood maltreatment and sex work in a cohort of drug-using youth and here: Pornography actresses: an assessment of the damaged goods hypothesis. - PubMed - NCBI
In terms of what intimacy needs are, I'm not basing it on my opinions, but on commonly accepted psychological theory. Freud's a good start, but there's also quite a bit of research on it in evolutionary development and psychology. Sure intimacy needs vary and change over time, but there are baseline needs fairly common across the human experience, even controlling for culture. What I was speaking about was the notion of performance or in this very specific case flat out show business.
By way of illustration, it is one thing to be a violent fellow who gets in fights all the time and wins one's fair share of them. It is another to be a professional fighter. It is a performance. It's the practice of an activity, but for the sake of entertainment and with the expectation of reward. Another way one can perform with their body is through sexuality. There is having sex and being fairly good at it according to the reviews of intimate partners and then there is playing a role, be it a popular porn star, a sought after stripper or the most sought after groupie to the stars. In that role, reputation matters and if there's one thing you simply don't do, it's talk out of school or, heaven forbid, condemn those who have enabled your own legend. Reading through her interview gives you the impression that performing this sexual role was her 15 minutes. Who wouldn't want that? But her analysis of the impact it had on her is part of that performance. Just as we don't expect film stars to crap on bad movies they were in (though they sometimes do), holding the line on your queen of the groupies rep is all in the game.
1
1031
Guest
Really fascinating stuff. But what I want to do is reply to only a portion of it because I'm not sure if I'm up to discussing all these points with the same attention you are.
I like your illustration of someone with aggression issues and a professional fighter. It's true that sometimes, one just enjoys the act of fighting as a form of expression but whether or not one receives monetary compensation for it doesn't necessarily affect the "purity" of expressing oneself in that context. The same is true for sex. I am going to hazard a guess that she's going to cash in on whatever she can at this point in life but am highly skeptical of any claims that fucking a rockstar at an early age somehow left her unable to cope with the reality of life up to this point.
Regarding your link:
I was only able to navigate to the abstract and that wasn't very convincing i.e. there was no information about the method of data gathering, control groups, and how the data (whatever it was) was interpreted and let's face it, there are different levels of "pornography actress," so I would at least want to know what qualifies as one in this study. I'd need more than claims, even when put in print.
But cheers for the discussion so far, it's cool when someone can disagree and find a way to keep things civil. As a token of my appreciation, here are some random emoji's I clicked on myself:
Not to quibble over details, but both studies do show the way the data was collected and interpreted in the abstract. In the article on porn actresses they used discriminant function analysis, which is a statistical variance method. If you'd like more info about the data used in the article, check here:
Pornography Actresses: Testing the Damaged Goods Hypothesis
The other article on child abuse and sex work used both univariate and logistical regression methodologies to analyze results from the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire which is a commonly applied tool used in psychological screenings at least since the 90s.
Both articles are fascinating reads in full, but the porn article is far more popular and widely reported on. The article on child abuse and sex work correlations is fairly standard academic analysis.
1
1031
Guest
No quibbling at all, I hadn't actually managed to navigate beyond the abstract. I'm short of time now but what (no doubt obvious) link is there to article from the abstract page?
Nah, it's not obvious. Pubmed is mostly an abstract farm. The child abuse/sex work article should be readable through the previously provided link if you arrow through. Here's a pdf of the porn one:
http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-cont...ssessment-of-the-Damaged-Goods-Hypothesis.pdf
1
1031
Guest
cheers for the link and apologies for my laziness in replying (and reading the link tbh).
There are a lot of interesting things there in terms of the results and methodology. Even how they obtained their sample is curious and leads me to speculate (not argue, mind you) on some things.
That being said, their results indicate that porn actresses enjoy a higher quality of life than the control group as well as higher self-esteem- want to rethink anything?
Most of the differences were minor imo. I mean if someone loses their virginity at 15 as opposed to 17, is that really a big deal later on in life? I say it isn't but I guess that's why we're having this conversation.
It doesn't seem to be that big a deal except that they may have higher correlations with becoming a sex worker. Performative intimacy becomes their norm due to having sex earlier, i.e. the performance of sex becomes tied to their sense of identity, so of course they are going to show higher measures of self esteem.cheers for the link and apologies for my laziness in replying (and reading the link tbh).
There are a lot of interesting things there in terms of the results and methodology. Even how they obtained their sample is curious and leads me to speculate (not argue, mind you) on some things.
That being said, their results indicate that porn actresses enjoy a higher quality of life than the control group as well as higher self-esteem- want to rethink anything?
Most of the differences were minor imo. I mean if someone loses their virginity at 15 as opposed to 17, is that really a big deal later on in life? I say it isn't but I guess that's why we're having this conversation.
In the other article on likelihood of early abuse and other sexual labor, there is more discussion of what some of the consequences can be, more along the lines of behavior than mental health. Higher incidences of drug use, unintended pregnancy etc.
So the conclusions to draw from these studies (and they're two of many, mind you) is that there is a statistically significant correlation between underage sex and seeing intimacy as performance and that when experiencing childhood sexual or other abuse, one is more likely to have negative outcomes later in life.
That certainly doesn't mean everyone who is abused will have an awful life, nor that everyone who has early sex will go on to become a porn star, but the prevalence of these results is why, at least in part, we orient adult behavior (through law, custom, etc) toward leaving children alone. The other part, as chronicled in the APA link I cited previously has to do with their developmental stage and difficulties adjusting morally and emotionally to sex and its consequences.
So, more simply stated, the onus is on adults to control their behavior both because we know how kids are and because we see how many of them end up. Self attestation after the fact can only be trusted within limits. That Bowie and others failed to fulfill this charge is a betrayal of their responsibilities as adults in a civilized world.
1
1031
Guest
Is that a bad thing a good thing or just a thing?
Yeah, that's a sad topic.
From one of your sources: "Overall, pornography actresses had higher scores on several psychological dimensions and appear to be as healthy as or healthier than the matched sample."
This was another interesting quote regarding drug use: "Interestingly, examination of recent drug use during the past six months found differences only on marijuana use, so recent drug use between the groups was quite similar."
Some of your personal conclusions seem to be at odds with what the researchers concluded. However, to be fair when it comes to interpreting data, the key word is interpret.
I guess we'll agree to disagree to the end on this one. I do find your use of the word "civilized" somewhat suspect but I don't want to get into semantics beyond what we have done already. I am still siding that she knew what she wanted (she's said as much) and as one member stated, they acted their parts equally (or something to that extent). It's like 15 year-old boys and their parents pretending they're victims when the get laid by a teacher. No, they knew what they wanted and they didn't protest.
I'll sign out of this conversation for now but I enjoyed reading what you have had to say and appreciate how you conducted your end of this.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
@Kneeblock and @blankI'm not sure where I sit at the momennt, but enjoying the back and forth. Just wanted to say thanks for keeping things so cool on a touchy topic. Makes it an enjoyable read for the rest of us
Yea it's been a really interesting read and a hot button topic that generally spirals out of control with one side saying the other is a pedo if they don't believe the exact same thing.
I'm not sure where I sit at the momennt, but enjoying the back and forth. Just wanted to say thanks for keeping things so cool on a touchy topic. Makes it an enjoyable read for the rest of us
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
stfu pedo.
P
Punch
Guest
Agreed homie.
The conclusions I'm drawing are not about people who do porn. The conclusions are about children who have sex with adults. The purpose of the two sources I cited was to show that they are:
1) At risk of professionalization of sexual behavior (e.g. becoming sex workers of any kind)
2) At risk of a whole host of other behaviors including drug use, depression etc.
I think you're fixating on positive results for porn stars, which is the whole point of that article in the first place. To whit, that the "damaged goods" hypothesis doesn't bear out in people thinking that all porn stars are rape or molestation victims. But the reason I cited it in the first place was to demonstrate the other finding of the research: that while there was no positive correlation to sexual abuse, there is a positive correlation to early sexual involvement.
In the other article, the consequences of youthful sexual involvement are unpacked further. In both cases there are corollaries between sex work of any kind (pornography, stripping, prostitution) and early sex. I suppose I haven't said the obvious thing that's implicit here, but those are not the best career choices in my view.
In the case of the young woman who slept with Bowie, she was also engaging in sexual labor as she made the rounds with not just him, but various rock stars, even being considered one of the most sought after groupies. What was transacted in those exchanges is anyone's guess, but proximity to celebrity can be considered its own currency. Her subsequent claims that being about that life had no discernible bad effects on her are unconvincing to say the least, particularly as you read through her words throughout the interview. And, as I posited several posts ago, since she is/was a sex performer, it's critical to never ever break character.
The last portion I wanted to comment on was about 15 year old boys and teachers. The notion that when someone is hormonal they are willing to have sex with an adult is not in question. What happens thereafter, particularly with someone in a position of power and authority over them like an adult teacher is is generally what they're unprepared for. The definition of consent has much less to do with being willing than it does with being able. Are you mentally and physically sufficiently resourced to give someone access to your body with full understanding of the action that is taking place? Children, by most developmental measures, and in most cases, are not when it comes to adult partners. And when they do, there are sometimes severe consequences.
In America, we say 16 in some states, 18 in others, is when you may have a chance of more readily navigating the minefield and not being unduly influenced by someone's resources or authority. If you as an adult choose to ignore those boundaries, you're liable to the rules of civilization (hence the term civilized).