Teenage Girls and SEX!

[Scotty]

I remember in a journalism class (it was an elective) the teacher joking about the number of ways and times certain newspapers could creatively work in the words 'teen' and 'sex' into a headline because it was guaranteed to get attention. Thus any story involving teens and sex is sure fire winner to the media.

Of course, that was a long time ago, when grown men could safely lust after teenage girls and get nothing more than a disapproving scowl.

Let me start out by suggesting that it is perfectly normal for adult males to have a sexual interest in young women. That interest is genetic and instinctive and has little to do with the man's age. It also has little to do with ethics, values or morality. Those things reign in the instinct, but they do not eliminate it. A psychologist or psychiatrist will tell you that pedophilia is a clinically diagnosed illness involving a sexual interest in pre-pubescent children. If you ask him to diagnose adult male interest in teenage girls he'll say 'normal'.

The hysteria over adult-child sex, however, over the past decade or so, has grown to such a degree, that virtually any interest expressed in anyone under the age of 18 can be termed 'pedophilia' by the media. Usually this is imbued with the kind of disapproving contempt reserved for all male sexuality, which is invariably considered crude and hostile to almost everyone around them, and certainly to females. The difficult for men is that many young women can, depending on hair, makeup, body type and attire, pass for anywhere from fourteen to twenty four.

Which brings me to Prince Andrew and the British media. Now notwithstanding the fact the tabloids over there had, up until the change of law in 2003, bare breasted teenage girls in their newspapers who were often as young as sixteen, notwithstanding that girls as young as 15 could and did appear nude in British mens magazines up until 2003, the media are baying after Prince Andrew because he is, or was, a friend of Jeffrey Epstein. Jeffrey Epstein was a respectable American financier until it emerged he had a particular interest in young girls.

The facts, as far as I've been able to see, is that this wealthy man liked to have young women 'massage' him. This sometimes included sex, but apparently that was a rarity. Or rather, it was a rarity when he didn't take care of it himself during the massage. All of the teenage girls went there willingly, recruiting each other, so to speak, and were apparently paid for what they did. All of them, so far as I've been able to find out, have admitted to the authorities that they lied about their ages and told him they were eighteen. Epstein is now in a Florida jail (18 months!) for soliciting a prostitute, and is considered a serious sex offender. The British media, including the Telegraph and Reuters, is referring to him as a pedophile and a child predator.

And so eager are the British media for a story they can work teenage sex into that Prince Andrew is under tremendous attack simply for being a friend of the man! I have to wonder where this is all headed, where this salacious double standard with regard to teenage girls - who are heavily, heavily sexualized in the media and yet considered absolutely out of bounds to even look at (figure that one out). Mens sexuality, normal sexuality, is being turned into something twisted and evil as the media, feminism, and eager to please politicians, criminalize normal male instinct.

[eyeball]

I have to wonder where this is all headed, where this salacious double standard with regard to teenage girls - who are heavily, heavily sexualized in the media and yet considered absolutely out of bounds to even look at (figure that one out). Mens sexuality, normal sexuality, is being turned into something twisted and evil as the media, feminism, and eager to please politicians, criminalize normal male instinct.

You left out religion as an agent that's long known for twisting men's sexuality into all sorts of FUBAR knots and while I'm certainly not suggesting that Islam is influencing this 'salacious double standard' in our society, the more extreme aspects of Islam suggest where things can head when religion is part of the mix, as it most certainly is in our society. I've long suggested that Muslim men who can't handle the sight of women in public should wear blinders as an alternative to women wearing burkas, perhaps this would be a good idea for men of any stripe who can't control themselves. Personally though I think that media has at least as great an influence these days as religion.

The fact is though looking, in the obviously lustful manner that so many men do, has an effect on women often starting when they're teens, and it should be out of bounds. I've had the benefit of listening to my daughter recount her experience of what it was like to grow up pretty in a small town and it wasn't always so pretty.

[Bonam]

The fact is though looking, in the obviously lustful manner that so many men do, has an effect on women often starting when they're teens, and it should be out of bounds.

What exactly do you mean by this statement? It should be illegal for an adult male to happen to look at a young female who crosses his path? We're not talking touching here, or making rude comments, but a mere glance or stare should now be criminalized? Might as well just ship all men off to an island somewhere where they'll never see a female in their lives to solve this "problem"?

Sorry but individuals of either gender are "at risk" of being looked at by others whenever they go out in public. If that makes them uncomfortable, they need to toughen up. Or they can take the Muslim solution and wear a burka.

[Jack Weber]

"Girls of fifteen

Sexually knowing

The ushers are sniffing

Eau-de-cologning

The seats are seductive

Celibate sitting

Pretty girls diggin'

Prettier women"

Peter Townshend...

[BC_chick]

While it may be 'normal' to be attracted to teenagers, acting on it is a different issue. No, it's not the same thing as pedophilia (it's called hebephilia) but it is not considered 'normal' in the psychological communities.

Yes, it's true that many teenagers are sexually active and they have sex with each other, but as in the case of the example you provided, sex with an adult usually entails something more than just desire. Either the adult is emotionally manipulating the teenager, or they are providing material goods to them.

The men justify their actions by saying the act is consensual, but it's not. At sixteen we don't allow children to vote or drink because their mental capacity is not fully formed. They are half-child, half-adult.

BTW, I'm not sure if you noticed or not, but I have constantly referred to teenagers without assigning gender. That's because many hebephiles are attracted to young boys.

Whatever gender their preference, they seek teenagers from broken homes, usually working single-moms who are under-privileged. They groom the teenager for a long time by providing things for them that the mother can't afford. Often times they are the first adult male role model that has been in the teenager's life and they provide the affection that the child has longed for.

My point is that they 'prey' on their victims in the exact same manner a rapist looks at body language and lifestyle of their victims. IOW, there IS a profile that these men fit and it does often have to do with power dynamics - whether they manipulate the children to give them money.

And just like the pedophile, they always say it was consensual when a teenager lacks the ability to consent no matter how old they may LOOK.

Just because it has gone on for millenia doesn't make it 'right'. Forced rape has also gone on for millenia, it's still not right.

What you're saying is the heterosexual equivalent of the mission statement of NAMBLA.

[Bonam]

And just like the pedophile, they always say it was consensual when a teenager lacks the ability to consent no matter how old they may LOOK.

To what extent is it the responsibility of an individual to investigate the true age of their sexual partner if that partner claims to be 18 or older?

[eyeball]

What exactly do you mean by this statement? It should be illegal for an adult male to happen to look at a young female who crosses his path? We're not talking touching here, or making rude comments, but a mere glance or stare should now be criminalized?

Did I say criminalized? No I didn't, so please settle down. I wasn't talking about touching or making rude comments but neither was I talking about a mere glance. Staring is definitely getting close though. It's rude but not a crime at least not until it crosses the line and edges towards stalking.

Might as well just ship all men off to an island somewhere where they'll never see a female in their lives to solve this "problem"?

No, but they should be made aware of the problem when it becomes one. I don't think it was as easy for girls in a small town to do that years and years ago but girls aren't what they used to be and I think they've learned that a little attitude can go a long way. Getting in someone's face in a small town for example gets around like you wouldn't believe. Some men just ship themselves out.

Sorry but individuals of either gender are "at risk" of being looked at by others whenever they go out in public. If that makes them uncomfortable, they need to toughen up. Or they can take the Muslim solution and wear a burka.

The risk also clearly goes both ways.

[Bonam]

Did I say criminalized? No I didn't, so please settle down.

You said "out of bounds". What, precisely, does that mean?

I wasn't talking about touching or making rude comments but neither was I talking about a mere glance. Staring is definitely getting close though.

And who gets to make this determination, whether something was a glance, a stare, or an "obviously lustful look"?

Edited March 9, 2011 by Bonam

[BC_chick]

To what extent is it the responsibility of an individual to investigate the true age of their sexual partner if that partner claims to be 18 or older?

If you got a fetish for young girls or boys, it'd be a wise idea to make that your responsibility. Unless of course, you don't mind being labelled a sex-offender for life and/or couple of years of doing time.

Kind of like making it your responsibility to cover your jimmy if you don't want to be stuck with child-support. Even if she says she's on the pill.

Edited March 9, 2011 by BC_chick

[eyeball]

You said "out of bounds". What, precisely, does that mean?

Socially repugnant. Socially repugnant behaviour can have natural repercussions for the socially repugnant that don't necessarily require or even call for legal weight. I imagine disgust and social shunning are probably even worse in some ways.

And who gets to make this determination, whether something was a glance, a stare, or an "obviously lustful look"?

I don't know, I guess it's similar to what they say about abuse, if it feels like it's happening it probably is.

I don't think it takes young girls very long to figure out what a real creep is and who they are, especially given the way they share just about anything and everything that happens with one another.

[Bonam]

If you got a fetish for young girls or boys, it'd be a wise idea to make that your responsibility. Unless of course, you don't mind being labelled a sex-offender for life and/or couple of years of doing time.

So should a person ask for government issued photo ID every time before having sex with someone? My point is that if someone makes the claim that they are 18 or older, and that based on their appearance that is not an obviously untruthful claim to an average observer, then believing them should not be a criminal act.

[Bonam]

Socially repugnant. Socially repugnant behaviour can have natural repercussions for the socially repugnant that don't necessarily require or even call for legal weight. I imagine disgust and social shunning are probably even worse in some ways.

I don't know, I guess it's similar to what they say about abuse, if it feels like it's happening it probably is.

I don't think it takes young girls very long to figure out what a real creep is and who they are, especially given the way they share just about anything and everything that happens with one another.

So what you are saying here is that people should be "shunned" based on the gossip of teenage girls? Thankfully, we all left that kind of social environment behind in high school.

[eyeball]

So what you are saying here is that people should be "shunned" based on the gossip of teenage girls? Thankfully, we all left that kind of social environment behind in high school.

No I just think this can be a natural result of what sometimes happens when an adult becomes overly infatuated with teenagers and can't stop himself from constantly looking down their tops. It probably explains why sex tourists go away, so they can leave that kind of social environment behind.

So what are you saying Bonam? That it should be socially acceptable to ogle teenagers?

[Moonlight Graham]

"If there's fluff on the muff then they're old enough." - Ali G

I don't actually believe that, it's just a hilarious quote.

[BC_chick]

So should a person ask for government issued photo ID every time before having sex with someone? My point is that if someone makes the claim that they are 18 or older, and that based on their appearance that is not an obviously untruthful claim to an average observer, then believing them should not be a criminal act.

If you know the repercussions with the law, then yes, it would be in your interest. Like in my previous example "She said she was on the pill" doesn't exempt you from child-support, you're responsible for protecting yourself.

If you know you have a desire for men or women much younger than you, maybe you could adopt the 'we ID anyone who looks under the age of 25' routine...

Just to be safe.

[Bonam]

If you know the repercussions with the law, then yes, it would be in your interest. Like in my previous example "She said she was on the pill" doesn't exempt you from child-support, you're responsible for protecting yourself.

If you know you have a desire for men or women much younger than you, maybe you could adopt the 'we ID anyone who looks under the age of 25' routine...

Just to be safe.

Right, that's what you'd have to do "to be safe" right now. But it doesn't make much sense to me that is the way it should be. If someone looks over 18, claims to be over 18, and yet actually turns out to be 17, you should not end up in jail or stigmatized as a sex offender because of that.

[Mr.Canada]

I don't understand what an 18 year old woman could offer besides sex. They don't have much life experience at 18 so I don't see what an older established adult could want with someone so young. Sure they could be nice to look at I guess but what else can they offer?

[Bryan]

I don't understand what an 18 year old woman could offer besides sex. They don't have much life experience at 18 so I don't see what an older established adult could want with someone so young. Sure they could be nice to look at I guess but what else can they offer?

Keep you up do date on the current slang? Texting acronyns?

[CANADIEN]

I don't understand what an 18 year old woman could offer besides sex. They don't have much life experience at 18 so I don't see what an older established adult could want with someone so young. Sure they could be nice to look at I guess but what else can they offer?

Most 18 year olds I know (attending Mass in an university based parish) have more common sense and judgement than we can ever expect from some people who shall remain anonymous.

[Scotty]

While it may be 'normal' to be attracted to teenagers, acting on it is a different issue. No, it's not the same thing as pedophilia (it's called hebephilia) but it is not considered 'normal' in the psychological communities.

Well, yes and no. Hebephilia, as I understand it, is particularly interested in younger teens, and is only considered diagnosable if it becomes a harmful obsession, a compulsive disorder, so to speak. A generalized sexual interest in young women which extends to attractive teenagers is not considered hebephilia.

This is, as I said, probably because you often can't tell a 22 year old from a 17 year old, especially if the latter is trying to appear older with makeup, clothes, etc. Tracy Lords was the centerfold in Penthouse magazine at 15. She had the face and body (and phony Id) to appear to be the 22 year old she claimed. But irrespective of her age, her physique was such as to draw male sexual interest.

The men justify their actions by saying the act is consensual, but it's not. At sixteen we don't allow children to vote or drink because their mental capacity is not fully formed. They are half-child, half-adult.

Nevertheless, sixteen is the age of consent. And I disagree that at 16, or 15, or 14 you don't know enough to turn down $200 to massage some naked guy in your underwear.

Whatever gender their preference, they seek teenagers from broken homes, usually working single-moms who are under-privileged. They groom the teenager for a long time by providing things for them that the mother can't afford. Often times they are the first adult male role model that has been in the teenager's life and they provide the affection that the child has longed for.

I don't know.It seems to me men prey on any attractive female and look to convince them to sleep with them. In this particular case the predatory behaviour seems to have consisted of asking particular girls if they have any friends who'd like to come over and join in. There was no seduction, false promises of love, grooming, etc. it was "Here's $200. Take your clothes off."

Just because it has gone on for millenia doesn't make it 'right'. Forced rape has also gone on for millenia, it's still not right.

I don't think you can equate an agreement between two people where both get what they want with rape. It's gone on for millennia, by which I think you mean older men, younger women, simply because the place of the male in teh relationship was to provide for the female and family, and younger men didn't have the resources. The place of the female was to breed children and take care of the house. Love was an esoteric notion not really necessary to the relationship. Parents sought older, established men who could take care of their teenage daughters. This was not an abusive situation, in other words.

What you're saying is the heterosexual equivalent of the mission statement of NAMBLA.

Only if you equate teenage girls to six year old boys, and we don't let the latter drive cars - or consent to sex with adults. I also don't think 6 year old boys can pass for 18. The interest in young boys, in other words, is completely unnatural. The interest in teenage girls is not.

Edited March 9, 2011 by Scotty

[Scotty]

To what extent is it the responsibility of an individual to investigate the true age of their sexual partner if that partner claims to be 18 or older?

Legally that depends on the jurisdiction. i think the point I would like to make is that if there's doubt, then sexual interest in her is not perverted or a disorder of any kind. It's normal male sexual interest.

[eyeball]

I don't understand what an 18 year old woman could offer besides sex. They don't have much life experience at 18 so I don't see what an older established adult could want with someone so young. Sure they could be nice to look at I guess but what else can they offer?

I recall driving up a crowded harbour one day and came across this sail-boat being steered by a fellow who clearly looked to be in his sixties wearing the biggest shit-eating grin you've ever seen. The crew, two buxom young ladies in matching bikinis were busy on deck readying the boat for sea.

It was one of those moments where everyone seemed to stop what they were doing, dock workers stood transfixed, other skippers drove their boats into docks without noticing.

The spell was broken when someone finally hollered, "you lucky bastard"! I suggested to a lady standing next to me that they might be his grand-daughters but she seemed dubious.

[Scotty]

Socially repugnant. Socially repugnant behaviour can have natural repercussions for the socially repugnant that don't necessarily require or even call for legal weight. I imagine disgust and social shunning are probably even worse in some ways.

But if sexual interest in attractive young women, even if they are under 18, is instinctive and genetic, why should we feel contempt and shun someone who feels that interest? We're not suggesting they should act upon it, for that would in most circumstances be considered morally deficient. However, the sexual interest itself is not something men have any control over.

[Scotty]

No I just think this can be a natural result of what sometimes happens when an adult becomes overly infatuated with teenagers and can't stop himself from constantly looking down their tops.

I'm reminded of a Seinfeld episode where George and Jerry are at a network boss's home and George gets caught looking down his 15 year old daughter's top. Jerry is trying to explain this to Elaine later, and says something to the effect that cleavage draws the male eye like a magnet, that nothing matters, including age, in the presence of cleavage. On the other hand, you don't stare. You notice it like looking at the sun. You glance and then quickly look away. Too dangerous to stare.

[Scotty]

I don't understand what an 18 year old woman could offer besides sex. They don't have much life experience at 18 so I don't see what an older established adult could want with someone so young. Sure they could be nice to look at I guess but what else can they offer?

What they want is sex with an attractive young woman. This tends to be a rather universal male desire.