DONATE NOW TO HELP UPGRADE LIBCOM.ORG

How would this be dealt with in libertarian com society?

123 posts / 0 new
Last post
kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Oct 13 2005 13:50
Ted Heath's Ghost wrote:

Yeah, fine - that's my point. You might not want to, but someone else might not feel it's a problem. It's not up to us to call them names or try and stop it - its up to the people involved.

It's pretty common to find 12-13 year olds going out or sleeping with people older than 18 - I've known people that age, or a little older, who only considered sleeping with people over 30 to be unacceptable or weird. It's the result of complex social relationships (also the fact that 12 year old boys repulse girls, with good reason) but ultimately, it's their decision, even if it's a huuuuuuuuge mistake in the end.

you sir are a defender of noncery and that makes you a sick fucker...imo

Garner
Offline
Joined: 30-10-03
Oct 13 2005 14:06
Ted Heath's Ghost wrote:
it's their decision, even if it's a huuuuuuuuge mistake in the end.

And there's the problem. The 12-year-old usually doesn't have enough experience to realise that it probably will be a huge mistake. The 23-year-old (or whatever) probably does, so it's their responsibility to refrain from doing something that, albeit consensual, could well fuck up the 12-year-old's life quite a lot.

gentle revolutionary
Offline
Joined: 31-10-04
Oct 13 2005 14:07

(not my translation)

Le Monde of January 26, 1977:

We received the following communication:

On January 27, 28, and 29, Bernard Dejager, Jean-Claude Gallien, and Jean Burckardt will by tried before the cour d'assises des Yvelines for lascivious acts with a minor of less than 15 years of age. Arrested in autumn of 1973, it is for more than three years now that they remain in remand. Only Bernard Dejager has recently benefited from the presumption of innocence. Such a long time in remand to investigate a simple `vice' affair, where the children have not been victims of the slightest violence, but have to the contrary testified before the examining magistrates that they consented -- although the law at present denies them their right to consent -- such a long time in remand we do consider scandalous in itself. Today they risk to be sentenced to a long prison term either for having had sexual relations with minors, boys as well as girls, or for having encouraged and taken photographs of their sexual plays. We believe that there is an incongruity between the designation as a `crime' which serves to legitimize such a severity, and the facts themselves; even more so between the antiquitated law and the reality of every day life in a society which tends to know about the sexuality of children and adolescents (thirteen-year olds are given the pill, for what doing?) French law contradicts itself if it recognizes a capacity for discernement in thirteen and fourteen year olds, so as to be able to try and sentence them, but denies them the same capability with respect to their emotional and sexual life. Three years for caresses and kisses are enough. We would not understand if on January the 29th, Dejager, Gallien, and Burckardt would not be freed.

This has been signed by:

Louis Aragon,

Francis Ponge,

Roland Barthes,

Simone de Beauvoir,

Judith Belladona

docteur Michel Bon,psychosociologue Bertrand Boulin,

Jean-Louis Bory,

Franois Chatelet,

Patrice Chéreau,

Jean-Pierre Colin,

Copi,

Michel Cressole,

Gilles et Fanny Deleuze,

Bernard Dort,

Franoise d'Eaubonne,

docteur Maurice Erne,

psychiatre Jean-Pierre Faye,

docteur Pierrette Garrou,

psychiatre Philippe Gavi,

docteur Pierre-Edmond Gay,

psychanalyste docteur Claire Gellman, psychologue,

docteur Robert Gellman,

psychiatre André Glucksmann,

Félix Guattari,

Daniel Guerin,

Pierre Guyotat,

Pierre Hahn,

Jean-Luc Henning,

Christian Hennion,

Jacques Henric,

Guy Hocquenghem,

docteur Bernard Kouchner,

Franoise Laborie,

Madeleine Lak,

Jack Lang,

Georges Lapassade,

Raymond Lepoutre,

Michel Leyris,

Jean-François Lyotard,

Dionys Mascolo,

Gabriel Matzneff,

Catherine Millet,

Vincent Montail,

Docteur Bernard Muldworf,

psychiatre Négrepont,

Marc Pierret,

Anne Querrien,

Grisldis Ral,

Franois Régnault,

Claude et Olivier Revault d'Allonnes,

Christiane Rochefort,

Gilles Sandier,

Pierre Samuel,

Jean-Paul Sartre,

René Schérer,

Philippe Sollers,

Gérard Soulier,

Victoria Therame,

Marie Thonon,

Catherine Valabrgue,

docteur Gérard Valls,

psychiatre Hélène Védrines,

Jean-Marie Vincent,

Jean-Michel Wilheim,

Danielle Sallenave,

Alain Cuny.

Garner
Offline
Joined: 30-10-03
Oct 13 2005 14:10

Bloody french intellectuals. Nonces, the lot of 'em.

wink

gentle revolutionary
Offline
Joined: 31-10-04
Oct 13 2005 14:43

You're right, they're wrong. Problem solved.

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Oct 13 2005 15:46

what's the big idea high lighting those names, i've only heard of one of them (satre) and he was just some intellectual fuckwit with his head up his arse...who were the rest members of FMBLA or summat? roll eyes

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Oct 13 2005 15:47
Ted Heath's Ghost wrote:
the button wrote:

Nonce = Not On Normal Communal Exercise. Prison slang.

That's a backronym. It's most likely derived from nancy.

Oh really? neutral

the button's picture
the button
Offline
Joined: 7-07-04
Oct 13 2005 15:52
John. wrote:
Oh really? neutral

Apparently.

Which is why "nonce" only refers to kiddy fiddlers who fiddle with little boys. Based on "nancy," see? There's a completely different word for kiddy fiddlers who fiddle with little girls, which lacks the homophobic resonances of nonce.

Oh no. Sorry. That's bollocks.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 13 2005 15:53
Ted Heath's Ghost wrote:
It's pretty common to find 12-13 year olds going out or sleeping with people older than 18 - I've known people that age, or a little older, who only considered sleeping with people over 30 to be unacceptable or weird. It's the result of complex social relationships (also the fact that 12 year old boys repulse girls, with good reason)

Well ha ha ha. But we are basically talking about young girls sleeping with older men., aren't we?

And that should give you a big fat clue about the fact that we're talking about an issue that's linked to the unequal balance of sexual power in our society, and hence we're not talking about equal or informed choices.

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Oct 13 2005 15:54
John. wrote:
Ted Heath's Ghost wrote:
the button wrote:

Nonce = Not On Normal Communal Exercise. Prison slang.

That's a backronym. It's most likely derived from nancy.

Oh really? neutral

no, not really at all

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 13 2005 15:55

I thought it was likely a generalisation of 'ponce'? confused

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Oct 13 2005 15:57
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
I thought it was likely a generalisation of 'ponce'? confused

perhaps that comes from pansy black bloc

the button's picture
the button
Offline
Joined: 7-07-04
Oct 13 2005 15:58
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
I thought it was likely a generalisation of 'ponce'? confused

Nah, "ponce" comes from people thinking that intelligent people were gay -- it's from the French verb, penser, to think.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 13 2005 16:03

yes, but once ponce becomes a word that means something, nonce can be generalised from it.

the button's picture
the button
Offline
Joined: 7-07-04
Oct 13 2005 16:04
the button wrote:
Nah, "ponce" comes from people thinking that intelligent people were gay -- it's from the French verb, penser, to think.

Actually, I made that up. embarrassed

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Oct 13 2005 16:14
the button wrote:
the button wrote:
Nah, "ponce" comes from people thinking that intelligent people were gay -- it's from the French verb, penser, to think.

Actually, I made that up. embarrassed

yep - ponce means pimp, and comes ffrom the port city of ponce in pueto rico, which was notorious for its prostitution

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 13 2005 18:02

Hi

Non-kiddie-fiddlers are bound to be most comfortable with revol68 style consensus. I don’t think there’s too much variation across the political spectrum on it. Even fervent right-wingers would likely see sense in his position, and it’s reflected in prevailing legislation. I question the profit in proffering arguments that risk an increase in the number of child/adult sexual liaisons, even for the sake of greater human sexual awareness.

I’m suspicious of the assertion that those of us who only countenance fucking within a framework of social consensus are afraid of discussing sexual ethics. Is it OK if I bring up bestiality again? Presumably, those who wish to explore child sexuality would be as willing to advance our understanding of inter-species love as well.

“Love”

LR

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 13 2005 18:05

I seem to remember that your position is that dolphins are 'dirty sluts' who want a bit of hot man-fish lovin? confused

Mr. T

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 13 2005 18:20

Hi

Quote:
I seem to remember that your position is that dolphins are 'dirty sluts' who want a bit of hot man-fish lovin?

They do want it, but I don't support giving it to them. I believe that having sex with animals is wrong. I think it’s alright to tease them and look at their privates. Given that, though, I don’t quite understand why I think it’s OK to milk them. Not dolphins, cows and that. Is it OK to milk a dolphin? I think so.

I suggest any rational creature would rather take it from behind from a small knobbed farmer than go through a life of forced-pregnancy, child separation and milking.

To be consistent, I would have thought child sex advocates would have to liberalise rules on inter-species intercourse.

Love

LR

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Oct 13 2005 18:27

what about sex with an under age dolphin?

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 13 2005 19:49

Hi

Dolphins are mammals. You could not milk an animal with gills. I think it’s OK to spunk up on fish eggs. It’s not my cup of tea, but I wouldn’t prohibit it.

Love

LR

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Oct 13 2005 21:18
Lazy Riser wrote:
You could not milk an animal with gills

What would you call extracting sturgeon's eggs?

Ted Heath's Ghost
Offline
Joined: 7-10-05
Oct 13 2005 22:36
Lazy Riser wrote:

I’m suspicious of the assertion that those of us who only countenance fucking within a framework of social consensus are afraid of discussing sexual ethics. Is it OK if I bring up bestiality again? Presumably, those who wish to explore child sexuality would be as willing to advance our understanding of inter-species love as well.

Well, bestiality implies non-consent from the animal involved. Zoophilia, on the other hand...

I just plum don't see how society has any right to interfere in people's private sex lives, assuming people's private sex lives are mutually consentual. It's the same principle as society not having anything to do with what people eat for breakfast, assuming people aren't hacking other people to death and then spreading them on toast (or any other breakfast related potentiality that involves harming others).

Quote:

I question the profit in proffering arguments that risk an increase in the number of child/adult sexual liaisons, even for the sake of greater human sexual awareness.

There is no "profit" to it other than that two consenting parties get to do what they want. If that creeps other people out, then that's their problem.

Again, I very much doubt you'd find kids younger than the current starting age of sexual activity (about 11, and then in a minority) who actually would want to have sex - so if they were forced into it, people would have to act according to whatever the rules for rape were, applied obviously to the individual situation. (What's more, peadophillic attacks are quite a rarity - the chances of it happening now, let alone in a healthier society, are almost nill). But, you're just gonna have to accept that very, very early in puberty, and even often in pre-pubescence, kids have sex, often with people older than them. It's part of their life and will end up shaping who they are.

I remember a friend of mine's 16th birthday, she pointed out that she could buy cigarettes and have sex - she'd been doing both since she was about 11, and had even had a baby a year before. The idea that we can stop people having sex is stupid, and I can't understand why the idea that we should is being considered by anarchists.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Oct 13 2005 23:00
Ted Heath's Ghost wrote:
The idea that we can stop people having sex is stupid, and I can't understand why the idea that we should is being considered by anarchists.

Cos older people using their authority and influence to fuck children fucks people up for life you fucking twat.

Quote:
(What's more, peadophillic attacks are quite a rarity - the chances of it happening now, let alone in a healthier society, are almost nill)

What are you talking about? There are at least 50,000-odd convicted paedos in the UK, mostly family members/close friends. Yeah the predatory paedos are mostly a media invention but so what - are you gonna defend incest as well?

Dolphins, on the other hand - they love the cock.

Ted Heath's Ghost
Offline
Joined: 7-10-05
Oct 13 2005 23:09
Quote:
Cos older people using their authority and influence to fuck children fucks people up for life you fucking twat.

If they fucking use their fucking authority and fucking influence to fucking force a fucking kid into fucking fucking then that's rape, isn't it, which i've already fucking mentioned is fucking wrong, fuck fuck fuck.

Quote:
Yeah the predatory paedos are mostly a media invention but so what -

that's what i was referring to, i guess i didnt make it clear.

Quote:
are you gonna defend incest as well?

well if it's mutually consentual...

Quote:
Dolphins, on the other hand - they love the cock.

y'know dolphins can pick up buckets with their cocks?

kalabine
Offline
Joined: 27-03-04
Oct 13 2005 23:11
John. wrote:

What are you talking about? There are at least 50,000-odd convicted paedos in the UK, mostly family members/close friends. Yeah the predatory paedos are mostly a media invention but so what - are you gonna defend incest as well?

ah, but you see they were misunderstood, or simply victims of an unjust legal system...

roll eyes

yeah right

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 14 2005 08:23

well if any of my 30+ year mate would have sex with a 11 year old and somehow try to claim on some woolly anarchist idea of consentual sex between two people, i would fucking dig their eye out - consentually of course.

look, the potential infringement of some theoretical freedom of having sex with anyone who has pubic hair is quite insignificant compared to opening the floodgates and making it publicly acceptable.

You fail to understand how sophisticated the grooming and predatory behaviour is - most often even the perpetrator doesn't see what they are doing with their behaviour.

Like revol said, no one is arguing for control of sex plays among young teenagers, it is the adult - child issues which concern us. And by default that is abusive since the situation is not level.

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Oct 14 2005 11:27

Hi

Quote:
What would you call extracting sturgeon's eggs?

“Roeing”. What would you call extracting chicken’s eggs? Milking? Only joking.

Ted Heath's Ghost wrote:
If that creeps other people out, then that's their problem.

Anti-working class position. If its wrong to sex up moo cows then it must be wrong to sexually engage children. I’m amazed John. hasn’t sent you packing.

Or do you think a moo cow could consent to sex with a human? A dolphin maybe?

Cheers

LR

Ted Heath's Ghost
Offline
Joined: 7-10-05
Oct 14 2005 11:33
Quote:
Anti-working class position.

Heaven forbid! I should be purged!

Quote:
I’m amazed John. hasn’t sent you packing.

Maybe it's because this is an anarchist forum?

Quote:
A dolphin maybe?

It's quite well known that dolphins very frequently attempt to initiate sex with humans. Make of that what you will.

JDMF's picture
JDMF
Offline
Joined: 21-05-04
Oct 14 2005 11:43
Ted Heath's Ghost wrote:
Quote:
I’m amazed John. hasn’t sent you packing.

Maybe it's because this is an anarchist forum?

what does anarchism has to do with it?

if you have any anarchist problem with this board it should surely be about unaccountability and lack of transparent processes to choose and recall the moderators, not about "anyone can say and do anything because its an anarchist board."