GirlChat #604848

Start A New Topic!  Submit SRF  Thread Index  Date Index  

Re: Coming Out vs. the Toybox

Posted by EthanEdwards on Thursday, October 30 2014 at 7:16:20PM
In reply to Re: Coming Out vs. the Toybox posted by Dissident on Wednesday, October 29 2014 at 08:50:28AM

While membership in B4U-ACT doesn't disqualify someone from being interviewed, my recollection is that Paul Cristiano's appearances do not usually mention his connection to b4u-act.

Virtuous Pedophiles as an organization gets quite a bit of press attention. It has a message that resonates with people in a way that B4U-ACT's does not.

I do take your point that there is a wide range of opinion among scientists about pedophilia, and activists have different views on them as well. I'm not aware of any positions Mike Bailey holds that are inconsistent with VP positions.

Among the rotten tomatoes coming my way lately I've seen the allegation that I ignore science, or pretend that science has settled some matter that it has not. These questions are too complicated for science to have any practical answers. A question like, "Does anarcho-syndicalism maximize human happiness (as measured by surveys)?" is in theory a scientific question, but it is just very hard to get good data. Really hard to get good controlled experiments.

Consider that we live in a society that (rightly, in my view) has in some important ways higher standards for children's welfare than ever before. For instance, we don't marry off girls without their consent at all, and rarely allow it below the age of 16. Acceptance in a few past societies of adult-child sex is largely irrelevant. This society also metes out iatrogenic harm in large doses. It is a scientific question whether a society that was transformed to approve of adult-child sex would have significant measurable harm to minors, and how much harm that would be. But it is going to be very hard to get close to performing that experiment. It is a question of values whether that harm would outweigh the benefits of some freedoms. Rind showed harm from adult-child sex was not universal and not typically severe. But it did exist. As another vital data source, we do know that large numbers of abuse survivors today believe they were seriously damaged. It's all a question of values how to weigh that harm against freedom. It's a question of values whether to try to transform society in some particular way when unsure of the outcome. I don't recall claiming that science has settled some relevant question, but I may not be remembering.





Follow ups:

Post a response :

Nickname Password
E-mail (optional)
Subject







Link URL (optional)
Link Title (optional)

Add your sigpic?