Re: Diss would call it debate

I wouldn't rely on any historical eveidence to support such views.

How convenient...

Well, it seems many here do rely on what they consider as reliable evidence just as the religious do and probably with as much accuracy.

Child prostitution

...is not what he was talking about.

No, and it wasn't in the same sentence if you look carefully. What I pointed out is that although child prostitution might have existed for a long time too it was mostly condemned and so might other adult/child sex. mmmmmmh?

Some of the vigilantes might see it differently as might the numbers involved in protecting children from such abuse.

His point is that the supply is endless. You may kill us all but there will be others to take our place. If you see it from the perspective of stopping one actor, that's very successful indeed; but if you see it from the perspective of shrinking the overall numbers, then no, it's never going to happen.

Quite agree, there will always be adult/child sexual relationships and paedophiles and child molsters but as pointed out some of those I mentioned do seem to have successes so they might see it differently and so might the children involved.

Have you actually seen any progress towards the legitimising of sexual relationships between adults and pre-pubescents over the last few decades?

No.

And yet still you don't see his argument for Oceania or Anarchy?

Flew by apparently .... whizzzzzzz

They have always done so it seems but there are equally just as many perhaps who regret having had early sex.

And we shouldn't legislate on the basis of regrets. The only thing you'll never regret is your own suicide.

I wouldn't know. Still very much alive ta!

Perhaps it has never occurred to you that this might have formed your current views on the subject and that these experiences were atypical?

And if so, perhaps it has never occurred to you that the atypical have as much right to have their feelings and pursuing their happiness as the typical?

Asexual children are not the problem. It is children who do not conform to the societal expectation of hormonal atrophy who are the problem.

I think we are back to minority rights again.

Perhaps because the "repression" is in your head

Oh, now I get it. Those who regret having had early sex are telling the truth, but those who regret having been repressed don't count, don't matter, are probably not even human. Am I right now?

I suppose it depends upon who you are talking to. If you mostly talk to people here on GC then you WILL get a decidedly different view of what is normal then perhaps elsewhere.

From some of the sources I have quoted previously it seems that it is especially atypical to have what most would regard as true sexual experiences prior to puberty rather than just sex-play and exploration.

As I said yesterday, to your non-answer, either this is a semantic game where it's the age and not the act that defines it, or it's still not an argument in support of contact bans.

The problem presumably is how do we protect those who would not on their own volition have sexual relationships from those who perhaps might - some nasty exploitative people about it seems. The same situation applies to the AOC and if you want to argue for no AOC, which I know many will, then do so but that is not likely to get very far unfortunately.