Originally posted by SurturHe's the guy that ruined Michael Moore and Family Guy, isn't he?
Harvey Weinstein is the king of the universe and has total control over all reality. It's why no actress could ever be expected to tell him no.Plus that forcefield technology he used to trap women in his hotel room...when is he gonna share that with the rest of the world?
Does Harvey not realize the forcefield would come in handy at the border?
Originally posted by Trocity
That's.. a ridiculous way of looking at it.
You hate the fact that humans have biologically driven behaviors? That's odd.
Originally posted by Trocity
There are plenty of male pedophiles who groom the kids and don't force themselves on them like rapists. Look at the many men on the To Catch a Predator series.
Red herring.
This is literally irrelevant to our points and it is not appropriate to even bring this up.
Originally posted by Trocity
I think you guys have some weird skewed view where all male pedophiles abduct and brutally rape kids, and older women who are pedophiles are sweet and nice and of course the little boy or girl wants it, so it's totally fine.
I think you're talking about something completely different, on purpose, because you know you have no point. I certainly wasn't a "little boy" at 17 or even 11. Most human males reach sexual maturity 11-14. Guess what that means? They are going to do sexually mature things like try to make babies.
And this may come as a shock to you but...human females like to bang, too.
Originally posted by Trocity
"Men are more likely to initiate and encourage sex with an older woman in power" lmao yes I'm sure the young male students are putting the moves on the teacher and seducing her, that's definitely how it works. 😉
Yup, you've got it right. That's almost exactly how it works in reality. 👆
And you'll shit yourself to know that some teenage girls make a game of sneaking into clubs/bars and trying to get laid. And then brag about it.
It's as if there is a difference between a 5 year old and a 16 year old brain.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Neither. It's normal to form romantic and just plain sexual relationships with people you interact with on a daily basis.Unless you suffer from some sort of mental disabilities, there's nothing morally or ethically wrong. It's only the current society who thinks there is a "power" issue. Unless she directly or indirectly threatens (or even implies) your grades would be impacted, there's nothing wrong with it.
Disagree. There's a whole bunch of dynamics happening in any relationship, that make inexperienced people very vulnerable to manipulation.
It's the same principles cult leaders like David Koresh use, to indoctrinate a following. Anyone, at any age, can fall prey to this, but the point of the invisible line on sexual relations, is to protect kids from potential predators, as well as to protect "can do" males from diving into the more subtle emotional manipulation and dramas of adult hood that, frankly, scar most men.
And those dramas WILL happen, after a certain age. They're inevitable. No one plans them, no one wants them, but it's wired in our DNA.
Frankly, if you examine the likes of Harvey Weinstein, or the typical high powered creep, you'll find the same story: Broken homes, broken marriages, father never there. Kids get scarred by that shit, and then carry it into the next generation, the same way victims of sex predators are highly likely to become sex predators themselves.
Originally posted by cdtm
Disagree. There's a whole bunch of dynamics happening in any relationship, that make inexperienced people very vulnerable to manipulation.
So your logic is simply, "Relationships are complicated humans are not capable of managing a relationship until they are 18 in some states and then, bam! they magically can handle the complexities of relationships...except in states where the law is 17, 16, 15, or 14. Then that arbitrary line is adjusted to those ages, accordingly"? Right, I captured the gist of your point?
Originally posted by cdtm
It's the same principles cult leaders like David Koresh use, to indoctrinate a following. Anyone, at any age, can fall prey to this, but the point of the invisible line on sexual relations, is to protect kids from potential predators, as well as to protect "can do" males from diving into the more subtle emotional manipulation and dramas of adult hood that, frankly, scar most men.
So your argument is that adults fall prey to manipulation by other adults so...a 17 year old male cannot possibly consent to a relationship with a 33 year old dance studio instructor?
Based on your logic, no one can consent to a relationship because of the complexities of relationships and the possibility of being manipulated by people like Koresh.
Here's my take: a 17 year old is more capable of consenting to a romantic relationship than a 33 year old who has been married for years in an abusive relationship and is undergoing a divorce. That's because the 33 year old is out of practice with relationships and their worldview has been tainted by their relationship.
You give far too much credit to a weird arbitrary line but put no practical thought into how relationships and experience actually work.
If you've ever known a person to divorce and try to get back into the dating game. The first few months or even years are awkward as f*** for the divorcee. 17 year olds are close to peak at the "game." You should fear that 17 year old manipulating than the 33 year old divorcee.
Originally posted by cdtm
Frankly, if you examine the likes of Harvey Weinstein, or the typical high powered creep, you'll find the same story: Broken homes, broken marriages, father never there. Kids get scarred by that shit, and then carry it into the next generation, the same way victims of sex predators are highly likely to become sex predators themselves.
You're now making a case for the lady who is coming from an abusive relationship. And you are making a case for why she was manipulated by the 17 year old. 😬
Originally posted by dadudemon
So your logic is simply, "Relationships are complicated humans are not capable of managing a relationship until they are 18 in some states and then, bam! they magically can handle the complexities of relationships...except in states where the law is 17, 16, 15, or 14. Then that arbitrary line is adjusted to those ages, accordingly"? Right, I captured the gist of your point?
There's also the whole underdeveloped mind thing. 14, 15, 16, and 17 is still very much growing.
So your argument is that adults fall prey to manipulation by other adults so...a 17 year old male cannot possibly consent to a relationship with a 33 year old dance studio instructor?Based on your logic, no one can consent to a relationship because of the complexities of relationships and the possibility of being manipulated by people like Koresh.
Here's my take: a 17 year old is more capable of consenting to a romantic relationship than a 33 year old who has been married for years in an abusive relationship and is undergoing a divorce. That's because the 33 year old is out of practice with relationships and their worldview has been tainted by their relationship.
You give far too much credit to a weird arbitrary line but put no practical thought into how relationships and experience actually work.
If you've ever known a person to divorce and try to get back into the dating game. The first few months or even years are awkward as f*** for the divorcee. 17 year olds are close to peak at the "game." You should fear that 17 year old manipulating than the 33 year old divorcee.
Oh, I'm more then aware of how relationships work between adults. We seem to be having two different conversations here.
I'm saying child labor laws exist for a reason. We don't throw pre-pube kids into operating heavy machinery, military service, or jobs with grueling hours, for example. Even if they're more then capable of performing the work.
That's because we want to make every effort to allow kids to develop into well adjusted adults. In good time, they'll hit adult hood, and take their blows with the rest of us, but we want to give them a chance to survive the experience. If they get horribly mangled and scarred by 14, that's not good for them, and it's not good for society. They're that much more likely to experience ptsd and all kinds of crippling problems by 20, let alone the middle age crisis most adults deal with.
You're now making a case for the lady who is coming from an abusive relationship. And you are making a case for why she was manipulated by the 17 year old. 😬
I'm making an argument for why she's dangerous. And why it's important to try and keep kids from becoming dangerous predators once they hit adult hood.