GirlChat #725596

Start A New Topic!  Submit SRF  Thread Index  Date Index  

How many times have we heard this before?

Posted by Dissident on Wednesday, August 08 2018 at 03:29:09AM
In reply to It will never happen posted by billi on Tuesday, August 07 2018 at 8:16:11PM

Do you know how wealthy we would all be if each of us received a nickel for every time someone said this or that type of social progress "would never happen"?

I know nothing we say will ever persuade you, Billi, but I'll say it any way for anyone who may want to read the refutations.

There are three main reasons in my mind why this is so and I have explained them here on this board. They are:

!) Disease

Except MAPs typically do not engage in the type of penetrative intercourse or the various other sexual practices that teleiophiles often obsess about and fill their pornography with. Or, in the case of hebephiles at least, do not focus on to such an extent and can actually live without. And besides that, Billi, have you ever heard of condoms? We have.

2) Harassment

Except all the harassment seems to come from those who do not respect the choices of others which they disapprove of. And that isn't us.

3) Broken Hearts.

One of those many weird assumptions of the popular narrative you support. That kids are incredibly fragile, and somehow can deal with the often fleeting relationships they form with peers yet purportedly cannot handle an adult moving on in a similar fashion. Even though it is far more likely that a younger person would lose interest and move on first, since they change considerably faster than adults typically do. And many known MAPs, such as Charlie Chaplain, actually married a younger person and stayed married to them in a loving manner for over 20 years -- a strong example of what a lengthy period of shared life experiences between two people can foster.

Then there is the aspect of the narrative that insists the only type of true and legitimate romantic relationship is one that lasts for the duration a couple's life time. That is a strong cultural bias based on our sacrosanct reverence for monogamous marriage, an institution that was originally created to pass on property and forge financial alliances, not becomes it promotes love.

The public will just never agree to subject their, or any, children to the least possibility of them being so victimized.

"Their" children? The idea of children as property of an adult public is something a growing youth liberation movement is challenging, and the movement is comprised of both youths and adults who do not agree that younger people are anyone's property.

Well, kids are not property to us. They are people whose potential is far greater than society allows. As social media grows, so does their previously almost completely suppressed voice. And along with that comes increasing evidence of their potential and competencies. We respect their basic worth as people, and do not consider them living china dolls who must be protected from the world. What they do need to be protected from is repression and draconian prohibition, just like the rest of us do.

The decision will ultimately be their own, and not adults on any possible side of the fence.






History suggests otherwise. Since those are the most famous of all the famous last words.


Follow ups:

Post a response :

Nickname Password
E-mail (optional)

Link URL (optional)
Link Title (optional)

Add your sigpic?