poketeased - inappropriate?

[Mazi]

I honestly wish that every situation was like yours, I think the laws would be very different. Sadly, this just isn't the case - there have been young people abused by adults, and that's why the laws are the way they are.

I think that it doesnt matter if you are 15 or 35 honestly. Women are terribly suggestible, ofcourse not all of them.. but most of them. Especially when they fall in love. Yes Im young, but those are my experiences. I just dont see difference between children and young girl older then 20 if someones hurt them.

And I think that building laws and acting like anyone younger then 18 or even 21 is considered child is making it worse. But those are just my opinions.

And thanks for kind words, but its really not that suprising. The fact that people here around age 14 are making choices about their future proffesion and mostly leaving parents due to school locations.. and in general they are considered more adults then kids.. those are reasons that lots of relationship works.

The fun thing is that in the most of the working relationships the girl is young and boy or man is adult. Boys are just boys, they know nothing about love at 15.. words of my gf

[janmb]

Jan - I think you're probably right. The question here isn't sex, or even consensual sex, it's a squabble over "age of maturity". In my mind, 14 isn't old enough. In the laws eyes, 16 is just barely old enough. No point bickering over that - neither one of us is going to budge much, and I doubt we're going to change policy on a widespread scale. Lets just shake hands, agree to disagree, and move on.

Yes, this is primarily a matter of maturity, what defines it and when it happens. Clearly not easy to measure, define or relate to at all - a highly subjective matter both on part of the subject as well as the beholder.

But it is definitely a topic that is closely related to the nature of sexuality here in this debate. And lets also keep in mind that this particular community here on milo is VERY far from being representative when it comes to sexuality and our ability to talk about it. We are very good at it compared to most people, so in fact a debate such as this one would been far more difficult to even have at all elsewhere, and most people let themselves be far more affected by sex as a topic in any related debate than the users of this site typically do.

In my view, most people tend to be extremely conservative about sex. Sex is something SO special, SO dangerous and even dirty to many people. Some places it is outright taboo in any shape or form.

That is something that pisses me off to no end.

Completely apart from the discussion about underage sex and porn, consider this:

If you ask a random person about where they define the transitions from infant, child, youth and adult you will get one answer. If you ask the same person the same question, but where they have been given a sexual context, directly or not, you will be a far more conservative answer.

When it comes to maturity and the ability to make responsible decisions, most people set far higher standards for sexuality than for pretty much everything else, including a lot of activities that will outright kill you if you go wrong.

A lot of places you can legally drive a 40 ton truck at high speeds at the age of 16, risking violent death to yourself and everyone else around you. Somehow that is far less a problem for most people than a 16 year old having sex with someone a few years older.

[janmb]

The fun thing is that in the most of the working relationships the girl is young and boy or man is adult. Boys are just boys, they know nothing about love at 15.. words of my gf

She is damn right too

The sad part is that it does help much if we get older though - the little head does most of the thinking anyway

[breathplayslut]

child
/CHīld/
Noun

A young human being below the age of full physical development or below the legal age of majority.
A son or daughter of any age.


So, by sheer definition in simplest terms, so as not to get confused, pedophilia is being sexually attracted to a young human below the age of full physical development. Wiki relates this as:

Girls usually complete puberty by ages 15–17



So yes, technically possible for it not to qualify as pedophilia, but playing the odds, it's more likely than not.

did you read what you wrote? First you post a definition containing the words "Legal age of majority", and then completely forget about it.

Granted - there are places in the world that recognize age of consent at being younger than I'm used to. And I agree - voluntary is critical. So is maturity. If an immature person gives consent, is it really consent?

I'll leave the location behind, because, as said, in some places you can have sex being as young as 12.
But the other half of the statement... Maturity. How do you measure it? How do you know when a person becomes mature enough to make a judgement (specifically, a judgement to make love)? You can't. The sheer number is blind and often wrong. More often than not. Also, even adults in their 30s and 40s have disappointments in love, are being used and have problems. You can't be mature enough not to make mistakes when dealing with other person. But, look, a teenager is old enough to make any necessary decision and to survive on their own. The fact that other society deems you a child up to 18 and then SUDDENLY you are mature adult is stupid and wrong.
You ask can a consent of an immature person be really a consent. Define to me when do you turn mature? Are YOU mature? What makes you mature in comparison to a 15yo person? What do you have which he/she doesn't? Basically, only age. I'v met A LOT of old people who are more stupid and less calm, perceptive and cautious than some highschoolers. Our personality and brain is pretty much done developing by the age of 10-14. After that it's only experience accumulation. Young people make a lot of stupid things because hormones fry their brains up, but VERY VERY RARELY they think they have done it completely wrong when they grow up. No more than adults do. I look back to my teens and I'v made a whole lot of bad things, things I wouldn't do now, things that were STUPID. But I'm not sorry I'v done them, And I would not like to change those things any more, than I'd like to change some of the recent things I'v done. So, was my consent back there really a consent? Sure. I was mature ENOUGH to think on my own. So how does sex differ?
Let's say your daughter have a crush on a good 25yo young man. He's a normal guy. Will you forbid the relationship? Do you think that you know better what's good for your daughter? Do you think she'll say "Thank you" when she turns 18? I think she'll more likely say "You ruined my only true love I'v ever had!!!" Because she did not have a chance to see how imperfect he actually was. Or maybe he WAS perfect for her, and you indeed have just ruined her happiness by driving him away and saying you'll call police if he ever comes close again? Did you think of that?
It's not like this relationship will ruin her life. She's grown up enogh. If she thinks about boys and stuff she's grown enough to go out with them, and if she likes a guy who's 10 years older - she has a reason. Maybe a foolish reason. Worst comes to worst she'll have sex whth him, then he'll break her heart, she'll cry for two nights, eat ice-cream, and continue living to meet someone else. It's NATURAL*. He has the cahnce to be her only one just like every other male on her way. You may protect her by having a TALK, by buying her a box of condoms, by giving her your opinion on this kind of relationship, if you must. But forcing her to break up with the man she likes is cruel, stupid, and harms her WAY more, than anything he can possibly do to her.

Okay - fair enough. But let me point out a couple of things -

You have repeatedly brought up that love between two consensual people shouldn't be mitigated by age. I might be persuaded to agree with this argument - except for one point. If the two people are in love - and one of them is a minor, as is the case in your example - why can't they wait? Why would it be wrong for them to wait a few years until they are both of consensual age before engaging in a physical relationship? If it truly is love for the sake of love, then a couple of years should make no difference at all.

The original topic has been skewed a bit - this originally began as a question, that turned into a debate about the merits of hentai porn, and whether or not fictional characters under the age of consent should be allowed. There was a lot of moral questioning, and some legal topics were referenced as well. The argument was made that kiddie porn might be a way to allow pedophiles to engage in their fantasies without hurting anyone. Now, I see the point here - but - actual kiddie porn is not a victimless crime. The hentai side of the coin seems to have landed on a very fine edge, and so be it. Everyone seems bent out of shape about the legality, and whether or not its right. Let me post a "what if" scenario. What if the laws governing kiddie porn didn't exist? This would allow pedophiles to freely engage their fantasies without involving minors, right? But if the laws didn't exist, then there is nothing governing the creation of said porn - and then you're back to exploiting kids to create the material for the pedo's in the first place. Everybody has thrown around the questionable/flexible morals, and the utopian examples of how the world might benefit from allowing this - nobody has mentioned the flip side of the coin - that without the rules prohibiting it entirely, that there exists the potential for abuse - and when the potential victims are kids, I don't think that's a chance that anyone really wants to take.

[Nezhul]

Why would it be wrong for them to wait a few years until they are both of consensual age before engaging in a physical relationship? If it truly is love for the sake of love, then a couple of years should make no difference at all.

You really believe that? This is wasting a few years, nothing more. Wasting a few years of your YOUTH. Sorry, but if someone suggested me to do so... well, think about it yourself. You love a man, you WANT him, you want to know him in every aspect. Yet there's a boundary that for few YEARS you can't even kiss him. Oh, it is soo cool sweet-talking about true love, but if you stop dreaming for a bit you'll understand, that human relationship are complex, but they are still logical and demanding. They just can't go on for ever without sexual experience, and I should point out that by our laws even TOUCHING an underaged person is an offence. Even thinking of him/her as your loved-one is offence. Let alone kissing, and definitely not sex. Under such strain 99.9(9)% of relationships are bound to end. Love needs fuel, and this fuel is the instinct of breeding, which can only be maintained by sexual activity - touching, kissing, flirting, fucking. Without it flame goes off and in the best case turns to just friendship.
Really, why can't they wait? Because there should be limits to ideolism, dear.

Everyone seems bent out of shape about the legality, and whether or not its right. Let me post a "what if" scenario. What if the laws governing kiddie porn didn't exist?

Now, let's see.
1) no one supports engaging unpubertated children into porn - this is unquestionable.
2) An underaged pubertated teen is still dependant on his/her parents, and that instrument should be used by them to prevent any stupid moves. Just like it's used to prevent getting a tatoo and other stupid things. Most parents are able to control their children by other means than outright forbidding something.
3) The problem is the law. Noone's saying an underaged pubertated teen should be considered fully adult. We are merely stating that the right to have sex whenever and with whomever he/she wants should be given to them, They have their own head already, and sex is not a threat anymore, that can cause unexpected children. It's not a prescious thing to be treasured untill marriage neither. Sex should be stripped out of age limitations, IMHO. Porn is the other thing. A forbidding laws to drink alcohol, drive a car or shoot in porn can still be preserved, I'm not against it. Those are still threats. Alcohol is a threat for health, Driving is for others, and porn is for image and reputation. But sex - sex is not a threat to anything anymore. Instead, as I stated already, forbidding laws is more of a threat, because teenagers already treat sex as something natural and easy, but forbidding laws make all kinds of problems, starting from buying a condom, ending up in going to a sexual consultation. We'v reached the limit where it's actually already more harm than use.

[breathplayslut]

Do I honestly believe that ... I'm not totally sure. I've been in a long-term, long distance relationship, and while I'd say that a physical component is important, it's not the end-all for a relationship either.

Okay - since you numbered your response, that makes it easier for me to respond.

1. Agreed.
2. Lets be fair - a parent says "No" to something - whats the control? It isn't forbidding it exactly, its about the punishment implied when the rule is broken. But you can't have a punishment without a rule - so ... ?
3.

We are merely stating that the right to have sex whenever and with whomever he/she wants should be given to them.

I can't say I agree. But that may be more a factor of language than not agreeing with your perspective. Let me rephrase, and see what you think. "A minor should be afforded the same respect as an adult in the matters of sexual freedom/preference." Okay - very possibly. But again, the issue wasn't necessarily consenting sex as pedophilia. I think a lot of the personal opinion comes from a matter of circumstance too. If an adult initiates sex with a minor, its a problem. If a minor initiates sex with an adult (lets just for the sake of argument assume the age gap is relatively close together) then is it still a problem? You made mention of sex not being a threat anymore - I'm not sure what you mean here either. Sex is always a threat - STD's AIDS, pregnancy, etc. These are all very real threats - but they exist regardless of the age. I do happen to agree with the availability of resources though. Teens who choose to be sexually active should have resources available to them, without having to jump thru hoops. Counseling, pregnancy tests, contraceptives, health screens - all of these should be easily available without fear of ridicule or reprisal. IMO.

[Nezhul]

2. Lets be fair - a parent says "No" to something - whats the control? It isn't forbidding it exactly, its about the punishment implied when the rule is broken. But you can't have a punishment without a rule - so ... ?

In my case it was most of the times reason. In other times it was forbidding something, but most of those times I'd loose interest to the forbidden thing really quick. If I didn't I generally managed to persuade parents that it's important for me. Same with everything else. Of course you do forbid something to a child, and you do punish him/her for wrongdoings, but you can't restrain him from something that's too important for him/her.

"A minor should be afforded the same respect as an adult in the matters of sexual freedom/preference."

yes

If an adult initiates sex with a minor, its a problem. If a minor initiates sex with an adult (lets just for the sake of argument assume the age gap is relatively close together) then is it still a problem?

I think those should be treated equally. Even if adult initiates sex - a minor can accept or deny it. Same with adult. I am for treating underaged pubertated people the same way as adults in the matter of sex. So they have same rights, and their partner has the same options as with another adult.

You made mention of sex not being a threat anymore - I'm not sure what you mean here either. Sex is always a threat - STD's AIDS, pregnancy, etc.

Yes, that's why I said earlier that we should substitute a forbidding policy with educational. Going over the road is a threat, but we are, from our early steps, educated to walk over it only under green light. And it works. Same may be done with sex. If we bring up our children with a thought that sex is normal, but you should always use condoms - it will be fine. In fact, it will be even better than it is now, because even now young girls get pregnant just because of lack of information a lot.

You can't just go ahead and cancel the forbidding law. That will do a lot of harm.
I think our government first of all should start sexual education of children in schools on a regular bases. Like one lesson a week. I remember my school years, and we were shown like 1 bad cartoon when we were already in high school. The cartoon was awful, it didn't explain anything much, was vague. That won't do. We need good lessons that explain all threats and how easy it is to avoid them. Underaged sex is fact. By the time of high school most of teens have had sex nowadays. Pretending that it's not there won't do.
So, get mass-education going for 10-15 years, then start rewriting laws. Make porn more accessible for underaged. Then in another 10 years you can get rid of the law about sexual age limit, replace it with a milder law. And get things going.

But seadly our governments are focused more on how to make more money without getting too much of public resonance, and prefer to play conservative and safe.

[Timshel]

Well said Mazi.

Ironically, sexytimes' views are sadly not prehistoric - unfortunately they are more of a modern trend.

Earlier in history, humans listened to nature. The difference between child and adult was puberty - which makes perfect sense, rather than the modern ideals that adulthood and sexual consent should be defined by a completely artificial age limit.

That is what defines pedophilia.

So I would assume by this thinking, you would agree that depicting pedophilia is not a good thing for the site to do right?

That is the main issue in my opinion. Do we think it is a good thing to have teases where pedophilia is depicted. I don't think it is a good thing to put out into this world. I don't care about an age difference or if something is taboo. I do care if it is fundamentally wrong.

[Nezhul]

Well said Mazi.

Ironically, sexytimes' views are sadly not prehistoric - unfortunately they are more of a modern trend.

Earlier in history, humans listened to nature. The difference between child and adult was puberty - which makes perfect sense, rather than the modern ideals that adulthood and sexual consent should be defined by a completely artificial age limit.

That is what defines pedophilia.

So I would assume by this thinking, you would agree that depicting pedophilia is not a good thing for the site to do right?

Definitely! Depicting pedophilia is bad for the site. HOWEVER I do not agree that the teases that were removed has anything to do with it. They featured girls that were, though being underaged by wiki, fully developed and pubertated.

[Banquo]

Banquo
The main problem I see is not that they are cartoons, but that each and every picture in the tease featured a busty developed female. I could understand if it was some loli pictures with flat breasts and no public hair. Instead, just by looking at pictures you could see a young girl. The only thing that made those girls underage is the connection to the characters of a pokemon series, who, in turn, were underaged by wiki.

I looked through the tease myself while it was still up, now apart from being incredibly long, it did feature pictures of girls that were not developed and not "busty" like you mentioned, yes some of the pics were clearly adults. But not all of them.

[janmb]

So I would assume by this thinking, you would agree that depicting pedophilia is not a good thing for the site to do right?

Not sure I understood your stance on the definition of pedophilia, but assuming you agree that pedophilia revolves around sexual arousal from pre-pubertal kids, then yes obviously.

[janmb]

I looked through the tease myself while it was still up, now apart from being incredibly long, it did feature pictures of girls that were not developed and not "busty" like you mentioned, yes some of the pics were clearly adults. But not all of them.

I rechecked it right now, and yeah I guess you are right. While most of them are definitely developed (and then some), a few of the pics are more debatable - again seen without any knowledge of the original cartoon at all.

[breathplayslut]

Well ... as the person who initiated the whole mess, let me first say - I'm sorry. I read thru the tease, and though it wasn't my cup of tea, I can honestly say I saw hard work, effort, creativeness, attentiveness, and even proper grammar. I had no moral qualms about your material, and to be honest, didn't exactly even get morally outraged at your choice in pics. My question was with regards to policy - which admittedly, got blown *way* out of hand. I do feel that some good points were raised on either side of the debate - and I feel that at the heart of the matter, everybody is on the same page with regards to the sexual abuse of kids.

I personally would like to see the tease redone, perhaps with different images - failing that, please don't rob the community of a talented author that clearly is willing to put forth the effort to better Milo by adding content. If you decide not to re-release this tease - at least keep an open mind with regards to creating another in the future.

so almost all of my fucks were given in a second

... I honestly tried, but this just made me chuckle, despite the nature of the post. I'm sure you were offended that your tease initated such a debate - and for any offense, I am truly sorry. As was mentioned, I don't think anyone perceived you to be a child molester, pedophile, or anything of the sort.

Again, I'm sorry for any offense - there was absolutely nothing against you.

[LittleElfBoy]

I downloaded as much teases as I could once I heard they're going to be taken down. I dunno if redistributing over TeaseMe is going to be legit but here is what I saved so far (I downloaded all Anime Teases I could, some might never be taken down, but better safe than sorry):


-Black Rose Witch
-Cheer her up!
-Fun with C.C.
-Luka Megurine Teasing Software
-Matsumoto's experiment
-Samus´s intermisson
-The Velvet Room
-To the director´s office!

EDIT: Oh, I also have the HTML files for Joining the light music club.

[janmb]

What you definitely can do:
Save the teases
Enjoy the after they are removed from milo
Share with others through other means than this site

What you will likely not be allowed:
Distribute removed teases here on milo