sex and "children": one owns one's own self
In reply to P. Lee, up in post #8
(--an aside: could you Regster people put big fat numbers next to comments so that we can easily find who people are responding to? It's super annoying to not have reference numbers. thanks--):
Let's go back 10,000 years, to the beginning of agriculture--- when people lived until about age 40, and "children" of 13 were having sex and having babies in prodigious numbers so that the culture could continue.
Let's skip up to Shakespeare's time, the late 1500s, when still "children" of 13 and 14 were having sex and having babies so that the culture could continue. To the point where unmarried 15 year old girls were at risk of becoming unmarriable "old maids".
Now zip forward to 2008 where suddenly (in evolutionary terms) "children" of 13, 14, 15, 16, and even 17 are now not expected to have sex, or even be sexually aware, for fear of prosecution.
Pedophilia, as the author of the article rightly asserts, is a monstrous crime. Heinous in numerable ways. But experimention with sexuality AS a legally-defined "CHILD" of 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 has an incredible evolutionary inertia that is not going to disappear merely because a bunch of Methuselah-aged societal elders write a law about it.
As a contemporary society we have to punish the bastards who conspire to take advantage of youth. But when youth are freely engaging in sexual play with each other, (ie. no coercion -- shouldn't that be the principle demarcator of crime anyway? ), where is the injury? There is none, and no crime should be prosecuted (save for prosecutors victimizing young girls and boys with this new scarlet letter, as previously pointed out).
Initiation of action is another key factor here. Mere possession of an image of a nude youth should not be enough--- this is in regards to a malicious youth sending a photo to a hated teacher in the example above. The teacher initiated no action, ergo no culpability. The pedo group initiated the procurement of coerced images, culpable. Youths flirting with each other via 'sexting' and cam-phone quick snaps: culpability in terms of action, but youth-to-youth sexual expression? No crime in my mind.
Why, I recall as a youth, as a 14 year old boy, engaging in mutually desired kissing, fondling, and yes, even oral sex (both ways!) with a girl of similar age. There is no crime there. In fact thank the Lord that youth can still experiment with sex, because how else will they become delightful lovers and partners in the future if they have no experiences while young?
harrumph. "prosecutors" indeed!