Sex before age of 15
Note: I do not endorse pedophilia. That is not what this blog post is about. I’m against active pedophilia, as you would know if you read my Right and Wrong post. And also, someone fresh out of arguments in a zoophilia debate recently claimed that I want to lower the “legal age of sexual intercourse” which is simply a lie and nothing I’m interested in. Apparently I have said that in a public debate, but stranegly no traces of that debate or my claims can be found nor can anyone else remember that I had said such a thing.
It is interesting… I just read a few articles about a swedish politician named Thomas Bodström, who really is one of those people with power you would like to catch some really bad disease and… caugh, really really much. Sadly, he isn’t very old yet so there’s probably no change for nature to take its’ course anytime soon. Oh, and he probably wants texts like these to be considered equal to attempted murder.
He is, for example, trying to change the laws so that the police may bug your phone if they as little as suspect that you’re going to do any sort of crime, and that police may enter your appartment at any time without a warrant and without any obligation to tell you that they’ve been there. Big brother society? Well, apparently there’s a term for his dictatorship – a “Bodströmsamhälle” (Bodström Society). He also pushes for a change in the child pornography laws so that even virtual children (not children at all, just virtual representations, avatars, played by adults) will be illegal. May I ask, who in the name of everything that is holy does that protect? No one! At all! Supress the pedophiles! Don’t let them even think about children! It has nothing to do with protecting actual children anymore, it’s about criminalizing the mind and fantasy of some people. Well, snuff movies are illegal, so why don’t make virtual snuff (horror movies) illegal too? That will protect the actors from getting virtually killed. Oh yeah. The justice!
He’s one of those people with the philosophy I truly hate. The philosophy is to criminalize things that doesn’t ever hurt or harm anyone. Their grounds to forbidding things is simply that they don’t “want” the perticular thing in “their world”. It’s all in black and white. If I can go without this and that, then so can everybody else – and if not, let’s just criminalize and mold people to think just like me. Yeah, that’ll be nice. A perfect world.
Anyhow, this is a small reference to my post about “Right and Wrong“, where I mentioned my sex debut at 7-8 years of age. One that I had full control of and consented to very much. The thing is that in 2005 or so, Bodström imposed a change to the law saying that without any exception, sex with someone below the age of 15 is rape. According to his law, you cannot at all possibly consent to having sex if you’re below 15 years of age. Oh?
EDIT: Some claim that kids below 15 shouldn’t have sex/can’t consent to sex because they don’t know fully what sex is about. I didn’t know exactly what sex was about when I was 8-9 I admit, but I knew that it felt good, was for procreation and that if done unprotected you could get AIDS. Well, even though I today know that the person you have sex with needs to have AIDS/HIV in order for you to get infected, it’s kind of still the same today. Sex feels good, heterosexuals can use if for procreation and if not protected you may get sexually transmitted diseases. Hell, that’s more than many other care about – some never give the STDs a second thought.No, you probably don’t know all there is to know about sex when you’re below 15, but most people don’t know all there is to know about sex their entire lives. Yeah you learned about overies and testicles and stuff when you were in school, but unless you’re truly interested in the workings of the human body and procreation organs, you’ll forget about all that in a week or two, and remember only the truly most important things there is to know about sex: that sex should feel good, sex should be fun, and that you should protect yourself to avoid diseases and unwanted pregnancy.You don’t need to know how the internal organs work. I sure don’t. I fuck you, you fuck me, it feels good. We go and comfirm that we’re free of STDs, come back, and throw away the condom.
Well, I understand the idea – to prevent rape of children. That is all well. But, recently there was this case of two 25 year old boys having sex with someone below 15; and the judgement was that the girl actually consented partly, making it less of a rape and more of taking advantage sexually of a minor. I know for a fact that you can consent to sex when you’re under 15, and I know for a fact that sex below 15 isn’t automatically painful or scarring and can be quite the opposite. It can be scarring, but so can sex in any age if done wrong.
But – apparently, Bodström shuts his eyes and ears to the possibility of consent before the age of 15, as he now wants to retry the law (case?), somehow making it clear to everyone that sex with anyone below the age of 15 is nonconsentual rape. In his world, a child cannot possibly be a sexual being. I find that more of a romantic dream of purity rather than seeing the facts. Just take a look at Japan where the legal age of intercourse is 13, and apparently it works for them. The island hasn’t been swallowed by the sea yet. Ah, but I guess the genes of Sweden automatically and flawlessly activates our will at the age of 15, turning us from the numb, quiet and fully gullable zombies we were before the age of 15 into concious human beings. It can’t be that you have an own will before that age. Oh what a load of bull…
How can someone who so clearly fights against democracy and personal integrity, and does it with such prejudice, be let to continue in politics? I guess that’s the price of democracy – everyone has equal right to speak their minds, which is good, but it may actually result in some idiot like him trying to remove everybody else’s right to speak.
He’s a perfect example of those people who thinks that they possess the ultimate “common sense”, and what they think and believe is the universal truth. Just because their philosophy fits perfectly with their lives doesn’t mean it will fit everyone’s. Laws have to keep some space to move around, some flexibility. He’s trying to make laws absolute – a system with no sense at all, just cold hard rules, black and white.
Oh, and sorry to break it to (some of) you, but if you think you’re reading between the lines, then you’re most probably very wrong. The world isn’t as black and white as you may have wanted it to be. If you didn’t try to read between the lines, then I salute you.
An interesting note (added 2007-11-22):
On a Swedish community I’m a member of, someone started a thread on the public forums, asking when was the first time other members had ever had sex. Many started to answer, as usual, and the answers were ranging from the usual 14-18, to 20, even later than that, and as expected, there were answers ranging from 14 and down to 4-5 years of age. For me, this isn’t really strange – I had sex with someone else at the age of ~7, and compared to today, it was pretty much the same thing and physical mechanics involved.
But, the most interesting part is that some people tried to tell us that we were wrong – that we couldn’t possibly had sex at that age. That our actions must have been led by an adult, or that you can’t possibly have an erection before puberty (which is simply a lie), and so forth. When told that I did what I did back then with a boy my age, all on our own by our own will, they went on to say that it couldn’t have been sex because you can’t get an erection and all that, and when countered, they went on to say that it can’t have been sex because you’d have to have orgasms too… which I personally had years before I had sex with another human. After that, those claiming that “it can’t be!!!” went completely silent.
Some people are so… bent on denying some things. They try every possible argument to keep being able to deny something, and if the argument is countered, they quickly try to find some other argument. Is this a fear of realizing the truth? Is it really that horrible to grasp that the world isn’t exactly what you thought it was? And why is it so hard for them to just accept that what is “normal” is “normal” and does not define anything other than “most frequent occurance”? And what’s with people’s inability to admit that they have been wrong, to admit that they’ve actually learned something? Is it so terrible to show that you evolve?
Why is it so horrible to accept that someone, at an age of 5-7, can happily have fullblown (yet probably without real sperm for some time) sex, pursuing pleasure and ultimately an ordinary orgasm? I know for a fact that this is completely possible. I was there. Telling me that I’m wrong is just plain stupid.
As mentioned earlier, this is partially a follow-up of the post “Right and Wrong“.
Image: personal photo
[...] continued in the post “Sex before age of 15“. Images: Po Ju (manga), personal [...]
Your blog is interesting!
Keep up the good work!
For what it’s worth, here’s my take. Different cultures have different ages of consent. Sometimes it works, you listed examples. Sometimes (like the Pitcairn Islands) it doesn’t. Relativists would say that this proves a fixed biological age is stupid. I’d agree with them to that point. However, there I’d diverge.
What if people don’t just have a biological age, but also an emotional age, an intellectual age and a few others besides? What if a person is “safely” ready (whatever that might mean) if and when the average of all these ages is “good enough”? Or maybe it’s more a case of “close enough”? What if these other cultures boost the emotional or intellectual age better than in America, so they can pass the “good enough” point sooner? That these kids are younger only on one measure, but much older on another.
It’s hard to actually measure these other ages, at least in the circumstances it’d matter in, sure. There’d probably be lots of disagreements, too. It might be useless except as a theory (with little to back it) to explain why relativism works with sexuality. It might be the worst explanation anyone has come up with. You, or a hundred other bloggers, could probably come up with something a million times better. I wish you would. Old thinking is flawed, we all agree. But there has to be more to the new thinking than to just point out the flaws in the old thinking.
So how do we go from the illogic you’ve observed for the way things have been done to something that’s saner, somewhat more consistent and explains what we know to be true even if we didn’t know why?