Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

anarchist views on paedophillia

Discussion in 'Anarchism and radical activism' started by larryliberty, Feb 24, 2010.

  1. Sarmaister

    SarmaisterMember Forum Member


    11

    0

    0

    Aug 8, 2011
     
    maybe from a stalinist viewpoint but a gulag packed with sedatives and nursing staff is a well enough solution. keep em high beyond the capability to escape.

    as for violent sex offenders (rapists stalkers etc) id put rapists up on public display chained to the wall. so everyone knows what they are.

    just kidding :lmao: , sterilize the lot ov them. <3
     
  2. Bentheanarchist

    BentheanarchistExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    931

    7

    66

    Dec 10, 2010
     
    Thats disgusting. not the anarchist way to handle sick pedo but the fascist authoritian way to do it.
     
  3. crustybeckham

    crustybeckhamExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    358

    4

    13

    Jan 22, 2012
     
    You don't write like a 12 year old...
    So because you have a crush on your PE teacher, you choose to support the idea that sex (because that's what it's about, isn't it? "Nailing" her?) is fine between a teenager and an adult. Now you draw a general conclusion solely based on your desire (yes I know, hormones are kicking) while discarding the fact that a relationship with such an age difference necessarily implies some kind of power relation. Besides, you are a lad, so you are in a position of force compared to a 12 year old girl (you know, patriarchy). You'd make a fantastic PR for child prostitution agency.
     
  4. Bentheanarchist

    BentheanarchistExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    931

    7

    66

    Dec 10, 2010
     
    Im 14 and i have complete control over what i do with my body. Teenagers are not kids its not pedophillia between a teen and an adult.
     
  5. crustybeckham

    crustybeckhamExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    358

    4

    13

    Jan 22, 2012
     
    Good for you. But then, and unless you look just like Justin Bieber, I doubt many adult women queue before your door or wink at you or make dirty comments about you. I mean that older men can be attracted to girls your age. The opposite is a much rarer occurence. I don't know if it is pedophilia per se, but I find it rather creepy. Wouldn't you find it creepy if a man in his forties was trying to hit on one of your female friends?
     
  6. Bentheanarchist

    BentheanarchistExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    931

    7

    66

    Dec 10, 2010
     
    If it is consensual it should not be illegal.
     
  7. punkmar77

    punkmar77Experienced Member Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    5,717

    171

    715

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    I'm not even talking about legality Ben, because fuck the law, but yes it is pedophilia because although you and the then 12 year old Anarchaos feel like you are in complete charge of your sexuality, body and thoughts you really aren't, for one simple reason...your brain is still growing and hasn't finished developing cognitive reasoning skills... also young lustful males tend to think with their genitals and damned be the consequences...having been raped at the age of 5, I think I can still speak on this subjectively, as 7 seconds once said 'It's not just boys fun'.
     
  8. Anarchaos

    AnarchaosMember Forum Member


    10

    0

    0

    Jun 22, 2012
     
    So punkmar, according to you, at what specific age do children go from being morons unable to decide for themselves to fully mature adults with responsibility? Let's call that age X years old, depending on how you feel. When a kid goes from being X-1 years old to X years old, what magical thing happens? What supernatural change goes on where they go from "not having finished developing cognitive reasoning skills" to fully functional human beings? It's just an arbitrary date, picked out of someone's ass.

    Let me state clearly that I'm not in favor of rape, prostitution, etc. Those are very bad things, and I empathize with people who have been subjected to that.

    The issue as I see it it ageism. It's older people telling younger people "You're stupid and incapable so we need to defend you by taking away your rights." That too is patriarchy in the form of paternalism. It's saying that any person under the age of X doesn't deserve the same rights as everyone else. Replace "underage" with "black", "gay", "heathen", "women" and you'll see that it's the exact same pattern of discrimination. Black people shouldn't have the right to be free because they're stupid and uneducated so we have to "protect" them by owning them. Gay people are at risk of contracting STDs and being hated by God so we have to "protect" them by forbidding their marriage and deviant lifestyles. Heathens are immoral and destined for hell and basically insane so we have to "protect" them by baptizing them against their will or burning them at the stake or kidnapping their children and raising them in the "correct" religion. Women are inferior to men because they have less developed brains and are emotional and unreasonable and weak so we need to "protect" them by keeping them in the kitchen and not allowing them to get jobs or vote. etc etc

    You want to "protect" children. That is a noble impulse. You want to accomplish this by taking away the freedoms of all those under a certain age, which is completely arbitrary and authoritarian.
     
  9. punkmar77

    punkmar77Experienced Member Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    5,717

    171

    715

    Nov 13, 2009
     United States
    When the fuck did I say 'morons' don't fuckin put words in my mouth, what I said was the brain hasn't finished growing yet which is quite different from calling children morons, look it up yourself and do your own homework. I'm not looking to protect any children, my children are grown adults and they were protected absolutely when they were children, which kept what happened to me from happening to them, as far as their own sexuality they were free to explore their own minds and bodies with people their own age...you want to call that ageism so be it...you want to advocate against ageism and decry prostitution? Go for it...I'm not taking anybodies freedoms so quit with your melodramatic scenarios, you want to advocate for pedophilia in some round about way then I say go fuck yourself. :ecouteurs:
     
  10. Anarchaos

    AnarchaosMember Forum Member


    10

    0

    0

    Jun 22, 2012
     
    Yeah, now who's putting words in someone's mouth? I AM NOT advocating pedophilia, I am advocating children's rights. You think you know better what's right for someone to do or not do with their own bodies. Your justification is "underdeveloped brains" make someone unable to choose for themselves. This sounds like an incredibly scientific statement. So in essence, you would be saying people who have brain injuries shouldn't be able to choose who they have sex with. People born with developmental disabilities shouldn't be able to choose who they have sex with. People with tertiary syphilis don't get to choose who they have sex with. People with brain tumors don't get to choose who they have sex with. All of these people have the equivalent of "underdeveloped brains". But you, with your "developed brain" afford yourself the moral authority to set the standards by which other people live their lives.

    Again, for the Nth time, I am not saying ALL SEXUAL PREDATORS GET CARTE BLANCHE!! Sexual predators do exist and will exist independent of ANY pedophilia whatsoever. Like I said before, if a 20 year old man seeks sex from a 17 year old girl, he's a disgusting monster pervert who should have his balls cut off, but a 60 year old man who fucks a 18 year old woman, he's potentially an upstanding pillar of the community, as per your own sexual morals. Arbitrary legal ages for ANYTHING are necessarily irrational and authoritarian.

    I also don't see the necessity of being rude. I simply have a disagreement with you, I don't know why you need to get vulgar, sir.
     
  11. petefukkinellis

    petefukkinellisMember New Member


    7

    0

    0

    Jun 16, 2012
     
    do people need to tend to have to defend themselves when having sex with you?

    BUT i agree. anyone who acts on their urges should be shot.
     
  12. crustybeckham

    crustybeckhamExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    358

    4

    13

    Jan 22, 2012
     

    No one is advocating that the legal system is good as far as kids' rights are concerned or even in itself (you are unlikely to find many "legalists" here). It is not a matter of respecting the law, it is just common sense. Clearly, you are not 12 (or you have been for the last 10 years). I don't know how things work in the U$ but in France there is a sexual majority. Basically when you are 15 and if the relationship is consented (but then how do you define consent?) you can have sex with an adult. This said, there are many other power dynamics that come into play and it is simplistic to sum it up with a call for "sexual liberation". I have been working with teenagers for 7 years now and while boys are convinced their intellectual maturity grows on par with their willy and that they're men ready to date proper women, girls are suspicious of the lurking 20 or 30 something with flashy smiles and cars, and they should be. It is not protecting them from themselves but these girls come from poor immigrant background and they know better than to fall in the webs of an older wealthy white wankers trying to reach into their panties with talk of "age is subjective" or "real freedom is in my bed". In a world where bodies are commodified, where sex is really a currency and fuels people's frustration, where your good looks can get you a status (but at what cost?), I think it is reasonnable to warn kids about the dangers.
     
  13. Caps

    CapsExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    393

    1

    6

    Nov 3, 2010
     

    So what about if you were 11 and fancied your gym teacher? What if you were 10? 9? etc. The problem is that there is no formula to determine when someone is ready to get involved with someone sexually. You might think that you were ready at 12 but I'm not sure everyone is. Likewise, I concede the point that someone being 16, 17, 18 or whatever doesn't necessarily mean they're ready to have sex with whoever. Inevitably any age is going to arbitrary. Besides that, your gym teacher should realise that, as s/he is in a position of responsibility, they have a duty of care and they should not take advantage of your feelings, however perfectly in control of yourself you may be or believe yourself to be. And what about labour? Were you physically ready to go down the mine at 12? Should we stop the arbitrary age restrictions that stops children from working 8 hour days? And what about drugs? Start selling booze to 6 year olds?
     
  14. Bentheanarchist

    BentheanarchistExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member


    931

    7

    66

    Dec 10, 2010
     
    I am a teenager not a kid. I'm mature enough to make my own choices. 12 year olds are kids and are not mature sexually to make a choice. I am not advocating pedophillia. Pedophillia is being attracted to Prepubscent children. I believe that is sick.
     
  15. Danarchy

    DanarchyExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    115

    1

    1

    Jan 16, 2012
     Canada
    I am pretty sick of this thread. The two examples you are giving as comparison Caps are not even in the same ball park. Sexual relations are a matter of consent, forced labour and drug consumption are not. No child ever 'chose' to go into the mine, not at 8, 10, 12, etc. Many of the miners I know in their 30' and 40's do not CHOOSE to go into the coal mines either, they do it because they have bills to pay and mouths to feed. They do it because they are wage SLAVES.

    Whether a 6 y/o has access to alcohol is a parents responsibility. I allow my 3 and 9 y/o to have the occasional sip of my beer and should they become involved in drugs later in their life as my daughter did at 14 they will receive the same open non-judgemental attitude so that they remain open and honest about what they are doing.

    Quite frankly if anyone, in an anarchist society or our current capitalist one, sexually touched my 9 y/o daughter I would slowly peel their skin off and watch them fucking bleed to death. Pedo's and Pederast's are after prepubescent children NOT teenagers it is NOT about consent or love it is about manipulation and power, prepubescent children are NOT capable of forming consent. Teenagers having relations with teachers or another person 10, 20, 30 years older may be inappropriate, sick and perverse or it may be totally acceptable depending on the individuals but it is not paedophilia.
     
  16. JesusCrust

    JesusCrustExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    1,085

    1

    0

    Apr 17, 2010
     
     
  17. Caps

    CapsExperienced Member Experienced member Forum Member


    393

    1

    6

    Nov 3, 2010
     
    Surely, drug taking is normally a matter of consent? Of course, you can force drugs on to people but generally they do it of their own free-will. The example of the six-year-old buying booze - they could do so of their own volition.

    However, I totally take your point. My point was that many young people want to be treated 'like adults' on a variety of things but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is wise to do so. I was being a bit facetious at the end of my post. My main point is that in current society (one with laws) there will always be an arbitrary line drawn that some people will think is right and others will think wrong.

    I think, as you've kind of indicated, parental responsibility is key and I think that goes with sexual relationships amongst many others and this will remain in anarchist society. I can't remember Bakunin's exact term but it was along the line of 'legitimate authority' - that is, it's not oppressive for a shoe-maker to tell you how best to take care of your shoes. Chomsky used a modern example of it's not oppression if a parent holds their child to stop them running into a road and being hit by a car. I would argue that the authority of a parent could likewise be considered to not be oppressive. Of course, this is not water-tight and, in an anarchist society, I'd imagine communities to be much tighter and parental abuse of authority would be put into check a lot more than in this form of isolating, alienating capitalist society.
     
  18. butcher

    butcherExperienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    2,118

    0

    18

    Sep 8, 2009
     
    indeed. Can it get moved to the trash please!
     
Loading...