Professor charged with incest

sadhatter said:
Really? Your using that line of logic for things like suicide bombers? For the love of logic man, kids are notorious for being able to be brainwashed by just about anything from media to peers. Parents suddenly are exempt from this? In trying to seem like the most open minded kid on the playground, you are ignoring very basic facts about child psychology. Read up on your opperant and classical conditioning, in specific the effectiveness of this on children.
Click to expand...

Would you like a spinning wheel for all that straw?

I'm just pointing out that just because you can't imagine yourself freely chosing to do a certain thing doesn't mean that it must be "brainwashing" at work.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Would you like a spinning wheel for all that straw?

I'm just pointing out that just because you can't imagine yourself freely chosing to do a certain thing doesn't mean that it must be "brainwashing" at work.
Click to expand...

True, *some* people find "god", and other irrational stuff late in age, suicide bombing is probably one of those, and generally speaking , probably the ultimate belief one get ;).

But I think the point of sadhatter is that the majority get it ingrained doing their youth, and later immersed into it by the society they live in. IOW, the vast majority get their religion by their parents for example. One of those example are female circumcision , or even male circumcision.
 
sadhatter said:
Look at all the people who have been brainwashed as children to not accept a blood transfusion, to blow themselves up for god, to hate people of a different color, to go through mutilating rituals ( female circumcision, lip plates, etc.), to be the 23rd wife of a cult leader, or any other number of things.

Your saying having sex with a parent is the one thing one cannot be brainwashed during childhood to do? That is the extraordinary claim my friend, you are the one who needs to supply evidence.
Click to expand...

No, what I am saying is there is no evidence that is what happened in this case. Yes it is possible, but being possible doesn't mean it happened.
 
Sheesh. Good points on the psychosocial need for a safe family structure that shelters an individual from the sexual demands of society.

It is and should be illegal regardless of age.
 
As creepy as I find it, I don't think sexual acts between consenting adults should ever be criminalized for any reason, ever.
 
Loss Leader said:
Sheesh. Good points on the psychosocial need for a safe family structure that shelters an individual from the sexual demands of society.

It is and should be illegal regardless of age.
Click to expand...

And if the two consenting adults did not realise that they were related?
 
qayak said:
Wasn't that the exact reason given to prevent gays from adopting children for so many years?
Click to expand...

The problem with that argument is that it applies to any adoption, making it worthless.

There is no evidence that the child was raised for that purpose.
Click to expand...

No evidence for this child. But what about in the future?

While the legal issue might directly involve only adults, I think it's short-sighted to think that it can't affect children.

You are projecting your feelings on the subject onto everyone else and that doesn't work in human relationships. In general, children do not want to have sex with their parents and vice versa, but that doesn't give an accurate gauge of individuals. Some children do want to have sex with their parents ans vice versa.
Click to expand...

I'm OK with some people not getting what they want. In fact, I bet you are too, even if you differ about what desires you're OK with thwarting.
 
Puppycow said:
Foundation was Asimov.

Stranger in a Strange Land was Heinlein's most famous, but I think the one most relevant to this discussion is To Sail Beyond the Sunset
Click to expand...

Well, ya know, the creamy white skin, the waist knee-length red hair, you're 2,000 years old, the mind starts to wander...


No temptation here. Actually, IIRC, she's an amazingly intelligent and confident woman, too.
 
Last edited:
Beerina said:
Well, ya know, the creamy white skin, the waist knee-length red hair, you're 2,000 years old, the mind starts to wander...

No temptation here. Actually, IIRC, she's an amazingly intelligent and confident woman, too.
Click to expand...

There was a recent book, Rant by Chuck Palaniuk, where the protaganist travels back in time and rapes his own mother in order to conceive himself. He does this several times thinking that the results will be a more perfect example of himself. (Or something like that.)

It was a rather disturbing, but interesting, read. I especially liked where the population had grown to the point where there were not enough facilities for people so they divided society in half, half being allowed to function normally during the day, the other half at night. Wouldn't that be a great way to cut down on traffic? :D
 
TubbaBlubba said:
While grooming is of course a realistic problem, in society, we still expect the girl to be able to make her own decisions as an adult.
Click to expand...

But the grooming problem extends deeper than that. If someone expects to be able to legally have sex with their child when the child reaches adulthood, I don't think it's unreasonable to think that they might be more willing to have sex with the child before they're an adult. And the chance that they'll get busted for it afterwards is also probably lower.

The ideal of a total transition from childhood to adulthood at some specific age is a fiction. We need the fiction for most purposes (like voting, etc) because the alternatives are worse. But I don't think we need it here, because the available alternative of outlawing incest regardless of age is quite acceptable. The cost to society for prohibiting incest even among adults is, I think, sufficiently low (as in, pretty much nonexistent) to justify its use in protecting children indirectly.
 
Ziggurat said:
But the grooming problem extends deeper than that. If someone expects to be able to legally have sex with their child when the child reaches adulthood, I don't think it's unreasonable to think that they might be more willing to have sex with the child before they're an adult. And the chance that they'll get busted for it afterwards is also probably lower.

The ideal of a total transition from childhood to adulthood at some specific age is a fiction. We need the fiction for most purposes (like voting, etc) because the alternatives are worse. But I don't think we need it here, because the available alternative of outlawing incest regardless of age is quite acceptable. The cost to society for prohibiting incest even among adults is, I think, sufficiently low (as in, pretty much nonexistent) to justify its use in protecting children indirectly.
Click to expand...

That's a slippery slope. There's no reason to believe that someone who would enjoy having sex with their children is also a pedophile.

And, by the way, I suppose you're opposed to legislating against sibling sex?
 
TragicMonkey said:
Yeah, because that didn't cause any problems for anybody!
Click to expand...

:D
Only because they had children who happened to be the royal heirs, really!

I actually felt that Jaime seemed really in love with his sister. I could feel how crushed he was when he remembered when she was getting married off to the king. He even relinquished his inheritance to join the Kingsguard just to be closer to her at court. Awwww!
 
Last edited:
TubbaBlubba said:
That's a slippery slope. There's no reason to believe that someone who would enjoy having sex with their children is also a pedophile.
Click to expand...

From everything I've heard (including people I know), most parent/child sex happens when the child is a minor. So while pedophilia and parent/child incest may not be axiomatically connected, there definitely appears to be a real-world correlation. Given that sex between consenting adults is rather easy to hide and a rather low enforcement priority, there's no reason to think that legalization of adult incest would change that correlation either. If a few adults who only developed a sexual attraction to their children after their children reach adulthood are denied carnal satisfaction, I can live with that. So can they, in fact.

Some people draw a line between sex with prepubescent children and sex with pubescent children, with only the former being labeled pedophilia and the latter called hebephilia or ephebophilia. These distinctions are not relevant to my argument, and in fact I never used any of these terms in my previous posts. So I'm taking your introduction of the term pedophile to mean broadly an adult who has sex with a minor with a significant age gap (so not including an 18 year old who has sex with a 17 year old), because otherwise your response wouldn't make sense.

And, by the way, I suppose you're opposed to legislating against sibling sex?
Click to expand...

Well, yes. Unless it's fraternal twins, many of the same problems exist. And if it's unfair that fraternal twins can't legally have sex with each other, well, they'll just have to suffer the terrible injustice of it.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Why couldn't he just do what all the other professors do, i.e., the students? I mean, hello, they're right there, and there are usually a lot of them to choose from. This is like going to a free buffet but bringing a sandwich from home!
Click to expand...

You can always be counted on for wonderfully tasteless insight. :D :boxedin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom