People on intensity you wanna fuck.

[Calandale]

I agree with Scrap; when a girl bleeds and a boy produces sperm, they are ready to continue the existence of the human race, for nature has brought them into the realm of adulthood, not humans with their cognitive bias.

Natural possibility doesn't mean that emotional stability is
there. Our society today is significantly more complex, in
a number of ways, from what it was previously. So, while
the physical capability DOES mean that we have to treat
children that age differently than we do younger ones,
it doesn't necessarily mean that they are ready to face
the UNNATURAL conditions which are modern world
imposes.

[Calandale]

I think the problem with looking at the issue in terms of what humans have always done historically is we're not taking into account the fact that childhood was very different then.  Children were taught and raised to be adults at a much younger age than we do now, something which I think we need to take into account when judging when a person is old enough for sex now.  I don't agree with the idea that there is some arbitrary age when everyone suddenly becomes emotionally mature enough to handle sex, to say that everyone matures at the same time is just insane.  I also believe that quite often people make more of a big deal about the emotional maturity needed to handle sex than they need to.  Perhaps the real issue is that we as a society are not preparing young adults for sex and all the related emotions that come with it?

My main concern with the example we're really discussing is not necessarily that she was under the age of consent in both the UK and US (granted she wasn't in Sweden), but the fact that being so much older than her there's always the underlying concern that she might be being taken advantage of by someone with a bit more savvy than she has.

Ah, but might not the older person be being
taken advantage by the younger as well? A nice
supple young body, and I stop thinking as clearly.

[Calandale]

But are we not going against our animal instincts? We are animals, after all.

We do this all the time though.
Working eight hour days ain't our
instinct. Every perversion that makes
up our modern life - do we wish to
abandon these all?

[Calandale]

A 15-year-old girl has more chance of producing healthier offspring than a woman in her mid-thirties.

But does she have more chance of raising a child mentally healthy than a woman in her mid-thirties?

That depends on the teachings of her predecessors. Just because someone's 15 doesn't mean that they're automatically naive or incompetent.

AND, if we hadn't ruined the family structure,
by imposing the concept of the 'nuclear family'
this would be a moot point.

[Calandale]

Silly question, Callaway. It has already been answered. Age does not matter, except in the context of some modern facade of decency. We are animals, so, let's not try to counter that. If the young girls smell right - let's fuck 'em and keep them pregnant, until we find a younger one that bleeds. Nothing to worry about. It is natural. Of course, it is up to the parents to educate them and get them ready to fuck as soon as possible.

</sarcastic bastard>

My first thought was asking him if he would do her if she started her periods at 8, since he insists that we are just animals and I don't think animal instincts have any problems with incest, but I thought that might be going a little too far.

I have no problem with incest. Especially if only for
pleasure. This is the thing. Pea and scrap are taking
what kinda amounts to the right-wing fundamentalist
view here - if God (or nature - whatever) intended
differently, He would have made it impossible. But,
life isn't what it was then. Animal instincts are NOT
what we need primarily to survive.

In a primitive environment, I'd be long dead, with my
vision. Humanity has moved to different standards.

Oh, and young pregnancies don't tend to be all that
safe, AFAIK. 

[Peter]

Historically, young people had sex and started families at a young age, but a lot of things were different then. People didn't live as long as they do now, and psychology wasn't as advanced. People didn't seem to care how these norms psychologically impacted children. At one point, age seven was considered "the age of reason" ffs. We know now that seven-year-olds are children and still developing. Society has progressed a lot since ancient times regarding protecting children.

I think it's less a case that people in the ancient world were wrong about developmental speed, and more that children these days have a lot more to learn, which takes a lot longer than it used to.  While before, 'education' didn't need to go much beyond the milking of goats and what activities would get you the bad sort of stoned, which was a state of development easily obtainable by age seven, today there's a vastly more complex noosphere to take in, without which an individual is severely handicapped, and which takes a correspondingly longer period of time to assimilate, thus why we deny individuals the power of decision-making in general until they're in their late teens.

[Peter]

Silly question, Callaway. It has already been answered. Age does not matter, except in the context of some modern facade of decency. We are animals, so, let's not try to counter that. If the young girls smell right - let's fuck 'em and keep them pregnant, until we find a younger one that bleeds. Nothing to worry about. It is natural. Of course, it is up to the parents to educate them and get them ready to fuck as soon as possible.

</sarcastic bastard>

My first thought was asking him if he would do her if she started her periods at 8, since he insists that we are just animals and I don't think animal instincts have any problems with incest, but I thought that might be going a little too far.

Animals (humans included) instinctively avoid incest.  Usually, animals are strongly attracted to other organisms which are genetically similar to themselves, a phenomena known as genetic sexual attraction, but there are a couple of mechanisms which counter this attraction in the specific cases of close relatives.  The Westermarck effect is an imprinting process in which the organism's sexual attraction towards other organisms which it grew up with, whether actually related or not, is inhibited.  In humans, this manifests as unrelated children who're raised together having little attraction to each other, while siblings who were separated at birth are often very strongly attracted to each other through their uninhibited genetic sexual attraction.  The other mechanism is the major histocompatibility complex.  This doesn't depend on imprinting, and makes organisms more attracted to other organisms who have a significantly different immune system to their own, as determined by scent. 

These factors combine to make an organism seek out another organism which is genetically similar, thus providing a good chance of producing well-adapted offspring, but not related, so reducing the chance of inbreeding depression through double-recessive genes, and with a significantly different immune system, thus ensuring maximal immune system variability and effectiveness in the offspring.

[Calandale]

Nice info 

[El]

I have a difficult time believing that any fifteen or even sixteen year old is ready for the emotional impact of sexual activity.

Yet this is how the human race has reproduced for over 250,000 years.

I think your and Callaway's perspectives are based on modern cultural norms.

Does anyone else have particular trouble accepting this argument when it's posted on an INTERNET MESSAGE BOARD?

since internet message boards are modern cultural norms?

They have their own norms (each can be a sort of an emergent culture), but I more meant that it's "mordern."

[Callaway]

Interesting information, Peter.

Here is a better link for the Major Histocompatibility Complex, though:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_histocompatibility_complex#MHC_and_sexual_selection

My experience was with pets.  Many of them seem to have no problems romancing their relatives.

[QuirkyCarla]

Cats in particular don't seem to have a problem with incest.

[Catrona]

I agree with Scrap; when a girl bleeds and a boy produces sperm, they are ready to continue the existence of the human race, for nature has brought them into the realm of adulthood, not humans with their cognitive bias.

Natural possibility doesn't mean that emotional stability is
there. Our society today is significantly more complex, in
a number of ways, from what it was previously. So, while
the physical capability DOES mean that we have to treat
children that age differently than we do younger ones,
it doesn't necessarily mean that they are ready to face
the UNNATURAL conditions which are modern world
imposes.

and what about these 4 yr-old girls who are getting their period?  is it ok for them to start fucking?

[Callaway]

I agree with Scrap; when a girl bleeds and a boy produces sperm, they are ready to continue the existence of the human race, for nature has brought them into the realm of adulthood, not humans with their cognitive bias.

Natural possibility doesn't mean that emotional stability is
there. Our society today is significantly more complex, in
a number of ways, from what it was previously. So, while
the physical capability DOES mean that we have to treat
children that age differently than we do younger ones,
it doesn't necessarily mean that they are ready to face
the UNNATURAL conditions which are modern world
imposes.

and what about these 4 yr-old girls who are getting their period?  is it ok for them to start fucking?

Good question, Catrona.

 

[Scrapheap]

I agree with Scrap; when a girl bleeds and a boy produces sperm, they are ready to continue the existence of the human race, for nature has brought them into the realm of adulthood, not humans with their cognitive bias.

Natural possibility doesn't mean that emotional stability is
there. Our society today is significantly more complex, in
a number of ways, from what it was previously. So, while
the physical capability DOES mean that we have to treat
children that age differently than we do younger ones,
it doesn't necessarily mean that they are ready to face
the UNNATURAL conditions which are modern world
imposes.

and what about these 4 yr-old girls who are getting their period?  is it ok for them to start fucking?

No, because going through childbirth would kill them. Dr.Drew had a show about this subject a while back.

[McGiver]

dr. drew is on  loveline.  a radio show based in pasadena calid=fornia on the radio station KA-ROQ.