Page 29 of 156 FirstFirst ... 19 27 28 29 30 31 39 79 129 ... LastLast
Results 841 to 870 of 4671

Thread: Random General Headlines

  1. #841
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    In Flanders' fields
    Posts
    641
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    My mind is open, and I'm interested in what you have to say (that sounds a bit patronising but I enjoy your posts and my posts tend to come across as confrontational even though I am pefectly calm, so I thought I would just disclaim it quickly!)



    Like I said, I teach these kids. In our system, secondary/high school starts around 12 and ends around 18. However, we also have a lot of kids who are held back, either in primary or secondary school. So a 12 year old and a 20 year old can end up eating in the same canteen. Moreover, I have a lot of groups where a 15 yr old and an 18 yr old are in the same class. They follow the same courses, have shared exam stress, live through the incredibly horrible experience of puberty together. And yes, there are differences, even in that same class group. But the connection they make, spending time together and getting to know each other, is often a lot stronger than the - often pretty shallow - age difference.

    I also spend a lot of my time teaching (in one way or another) sex ed. I did two sex ed classes in second year this year (13 and 14 yr olds), where some of the kids had never dated or kissed anyone, and others clearly already had some sexual experience. I teach catholic religion in 3d, 4th, 5th and 6th grade, meaning I get them when they're around 14 or 15 and hand them over sometimes well after their 18th birthday. I see how they grow, how they change, and how they learn.

    14 yr olds manipulate other 14 yr olds into doing things they don't really want to do. Part of my job is to teach them to respect their own boundaries and pace, and to learn to say no; but also to respect other people's boundaries and pace, and to learn to accept no. There are strong cultural differences surrounding that, and it's not an easy subject, but my students do talk about sex with a lot of insight, and they're eager to learn - how to say no, how to make it more enjoyable, why it's not always good, why some people wait and others fuck around. They're a generation for whom sex is omnipresent, and there's so much pressure on them to have it: it needs to be discussed properly.

    But the age limit is thoroughly articificial, and sometimes it can do more harm than help. 14 yr old boys tend to be incredibly self-centered about sex, even when they really don't want to be. They tend to talk to older friends or brothers about it, often lacking experience themselves, instead of parents, or - even worse - look stuff up on the 'net. They tend to - involuntarily - make their first encounter unpleasent if their partner is also a virgin. The older a boy is, the less selfish he gets (whether he's a virgin or not). For a girl, speaking purely from a sexual angle, it can be a lot better to be with a boy who's a couple of years older, simply because at least they'll not board and retreat in under five minutes, and then be clueless as to what to do next. Older boys also tend to be more relaxed about sex, accepting their partner's wishes more, and not considering a rejection of sex as a slight against their percieved manhood.

    I'm not saying this is absolutely true for everyone, but this is supported by litterature and research, and it's also really my experience from teaching teens and young adults for almost 9 years now.

    Also, and this is a factor that's not often discussed: most gay teens have their first sexual encounter with someone older than them, because they're often a lot more insecure about what to do and where to go with their feelings and desires. It often requires someone who has a little more experience to set that in motion.

    I think that as a society, we have this tendency to treat our teenagers as if they're children. The problem is: they're not. Yes, their brains haven't fully grown yet. All over the world, fourteen year olds get married, have jobs, fight wars. I'm not saying that's a particularly good or bad thing, it's just a part of life. We've gradually raised the moment of entry into adulthood from 12 to 18 and even 21, and it's creating all kinds of problems.
    Yes, a lot of teens get pressured into sex, whether it's from an oversexualized media landscape or by a partner who threatens to leave them or expose them as a prude if they don't. But that partner doesn't have to be older, on the contrary.

    I'm going to give one other example: one of my friends, also a teacher, had a student in 3d grade (she was 15) who had a crush on him. She would linger after class, ask him about his favourite movies, stand up for him when her classmates made it difficult for him to teach. He was about 24 at the time. Gradually, he fell in love with her. They started dating after she graduated, when she was 18. They've been together for three years now, and talking about marriage.
    It's a relationship that has all the potential of being framed as a seedy predator/prey kind of thing. But I know these people, and it couldn't be further from the truth. Which is why I recoil when I see people described as predators simply because they're over an artificial, scientifically meaningless line in the sand.

  2. #842
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,722
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Informed and well-reasoned, but I still disagree, children all over the world are pushed into adult situations not because they are actually capable or suited to these thngs, but because our world is brutal and exploitative - we are only just now beginning to reach a level of civilisation which means we don't have to put kids to work, fighting or breeding ASAP. The fact of the matter is the age of sixteen, while an artificial line, is still a VERY young age to have to deal with things like pregnancy and STIs, and increasing the social acceptability of sexual activity with individuals any younger than that is probably not wise - especially seeing as our culture has such a easy going attitude towards rape and underage sex.

    You cite a good example but do you really think that it is representative of most underage relationships? Do we prioritise making exceptions for the few and far between or do we deal harshly with the myriad abuses? Because ultimately, legislation will come to that impasse

  3. #843
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    In Flanders' fields
    Posts
    641
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    But legislation is not equipped to deal with what is actually causing problems when teens start having sex. You mentioned pregnancy: various international studies have pointed out that the key to avoiding teen pregnancy is a good home life, proper sex ed (preferably by the parents, preferably before the age of 12) and easy access to condoms and birth control.
    How do you legislate parents talking to their children about sex? You can't, and you shouldn't. If parents don't teach their kids about sex, don't have an open dialogue with them, then kids are going to sneak around their parents' backs, often going without any protection because to buy it would arouse suspicion and lead to punishment.
    Same goes with a good home life: children with low self esteem, who come from broken families and who are less educated have a higher risk of engaging in dangerous sexual activity. Same goes for gay boys who experience a lot of internalized homonegativity. You can't legislate that.

    So what do we legislate? Something that doesn't actually cause the problems of abuse, teen pregnancy or the spread of STI's. There's no data conclusively showing that making it an offense to have sex when younger than 16 is helpful at all. The Belgian sex ed and reproductive rights organisation Sensoa has pleaded on a number of cases to at least lower the age line to 14, because it's a lot more realistic and it could prevent a lot of sneaking around. Because it's the sneaking around that causes problems.

    I cited one good example, because I'm not going to cite every single one, and because it's the most 'extreme' case I have firsthand knowledge of. One of my best friends started a relationship with his partner (who was HIV positive since birth) when he was 14 and my friend was 20 - they stayed together for ten years. Yes, they'd grown apart, because Jan had a lot of growing up to do and he grew into a different man than the boy Ruben fell in love with. But that happens in all relationships.

    There's also a hypocrisy in the 16 or 18 year barriere, because after that we just don't care. On the contrary, after 18 media promote the age gap: just watch any Sean Connery or George Clooney movie. Yes, you're an adult and free to make your own decisions, but that doesn't mean they're any better, any less harmfull or any more thought out.

    I'm also not convinced that forcing children to be children for so long is civilization. In fact, I sincerely doubt it. The students I teach in 5th and 6th grade are not children, they're young adults. They don't handle responsiblity well in part because nobody gives it to them, and they rebel because people don't take them seriously. Like we would, if we were being treated as toddlers at our age. Arthur Rimbaud wrote some of the greatest poetry in French literature at 17, and Schelling had written the core of his philosophy down at 19. 16 used to be the age when great thinkers started their university education, often producing their best and most original work. We're brilliantly productive and creative as adolescents, moreso than as adults. There's all kinds of evidence against our modern tendency to overprotect our teens.

    Our culture however is a thoroughly misogynic one, and obsessed with sex because it's still something we fear. Especially in our children: children are sensual creatures, they start having sexual feelings and showing sexual behaviour long before they hit puberty and our tendency to shut that development down produces dysfunctional and unhappy adults who in turn create this society.

  4. #844
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    67
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Elke the fact remains that a line still has to be drawn, doesn't it? It's one thing not to agree with it, I'm glad deepvoid fronted and said he agreed with the Canadian model, but you haven't really offered up an alternative except better sex education (of which everyone pretty much agrees).
    I really struggle to see what you are trying to say here. I don't think anyone is going to argue with your suggestion of better sex ed. Do you really not think that an age gap limitation should be in place? Or is it the consequences of transgressing you don't agree with?

    Quote Originally Posted by Elke View Post
    Arthur Rimbaud wrote some of the greatest poetry in French literature at 17, and Schelling had written the core of his philosophy down at 19. 16 used to be the age when great thinkers started their university education, often producing their best and most original work. We're brilliantly productive and creative as adolescents, moreso than as adults. There's all kinds of evidence against our modern tendency to overprotect our teens.
    bit off tangent but there's also all kinds of evidence that the modern tendency to provide everyone with a full education is more beneficial. Individual examples don't mean anything, we had those prodigies in years gone by, we have them today and we'll have them in the future. How many Rimbaulds and Schellings didn't get to realise their potential due to circumstance of an age gone past? I think you're romantacising a bit.


  5. #845
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    In Flanders' fields
    Posts
    641
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    That might be a fair point, about the uniqueness of those individuals. I'm inclined to think not, though.

    As for what I would be willing to support: a fourteen years age limit, with a maximal six year age gap for penetrative sex, provided harm / lack of consent has to be proved on the part of either or both sides (and not exclusively the oldest / male party); AND provided schools are forced to incorporate a decent sex ed program, and teens (take minus 18 or as long as they don't start their first job) can get reproductive health services and birth control for free / at reduced rates.

  6. #846
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Montreal, QC
    Posts
    2,649
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    While I agree with the Canadian model, I must say that the 12-13yo close-age exemption makes me a bit uncomfortable.
    I think 12 is awfully young to have sex even if partner is only 14. However, I think it completely removes any possibilities of discrimination.

    It comes down to parents doing a better job at parenting. I certainly did not lose my virginity at 12 and glad I didn't.

    I think the parents of Hunt's partner probably had a few other avenues to explore before going to the authorities. This is where I think they faulted.
    It's one thing to tell Hunt to back off but you can talk to her parents, school principals, therapist. I mean, the authorities should have been the absolute last resort and even then, I'm not sure it's the right move if no harm is being done to your own child, which seems to be the case here.

  7. #847
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    67
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Elke View Post
    As for what I would be willing to support: a fourteen years age limit, with a maximal six year age gap for penetrative sex, provided harm / lack of consent has to be proved on the part of either or both sides (and not exclusively the oldest / male party); AND provided schools are forced to incorporate a decent sex ed program, and teens (take minus 18 or as long as they don't start their first job) can get reproductive health services and birth control for free / at reduced rates.
    personally I'd feel a little uneasy about a 14 year old having sex with a 20 year old, but I agree with the rest. I respect that you actually deal with this issue day to day, just agree to disagree on what's a suitable age gap.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elke View Post
    That might be a fair point, about the uniqueness of those individuals. I'm inclined to think not, though.
    again agree to totally disagree. 16 year olds still attend university, except nowadays its more likely due to aptitude than wealth, status and sex. Not only are the unique talents better off, but regular people are being educated.


    Quote Originally Posted by Deepvoid View Post
    While I agree with the Canadian model, I must say that the 12-13yo close-age exemption makes me a bit uncomfortable.
    I think 12 is awfully young to have sex even if partner is only 14. However, I think it completely removes any possibilities of discrimination.
    I am curious as to what happens in regards to 11 year olds then. My state is pretty much age gap. Age of consent 16, under that 10 year olds no more than 2 year age gap, and under 10 comes under 'normal sexual exploration' (as long as its with a 'peer' and not violent or deemed coercive).
    Quote Originally Posted by Deepvoid View Post
    I think the parents of Hunt's partner probably had a few other avenues to explore before going to the authorities. This is where I think they faulted.
    it sounds like you're making a lot of assumptions, I don't know the specifics but the parents of the younger girl said this was a last resort. It's also a little silly to come out with a line like 'parents should do a better job at parenting'. What does that mean? In the next breath you criticise what a lot of people would consider parenting.


  8. #848
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Highland Park, IL
    Posts
    14,382
    Mentioned
    994 Post(s)

    Random General Headlines

    Warren Jeffs would love Elke.

    None of Elke's suggestions will ever happen in this country. We still have states that teach creationism. The conservative right still has way too much control in this country to ever mandate comprehensive sex education or birth control education. Elke teaches young people in Belgium. This ain't Belgium.

    It appears that this victim comes from a very Christian family concerned about protecting her "purity." They have freedom of religion; they feel it is their job to protect their daughter from losing her "purity" before it's time, and that it is their constitutional right. Their 14-yr-old daughter does not yet have rights that outweigh her parents' right to protect her.

    They may seem like young adults at 14, but our government does not view them as anything other than children. And nobody is likely to advocate changing that anytime soon, especially not parents.
    Last edited by allegro; 06-01-2013 at 08:15 PM.

  9. #849
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    4,210
    Mentioned
    174 Post(s)
    wooo, Elke finally gave us a boundary for youth sex legality!

    I've been thinking about this and perhaps a better boundary would be how far the individual is through puberty. There are measurable steps of progress that also relate to mental capacity for sex. A group of doctors and psychologists would work to define this line. Every 5 years they would reexamine that line using any new findings. You would also have to factor in the discretion of the parent and the discretion of the least mature kid. If neither party has an issue and there is no obvious harm, then there should be a crime (even if an outside party raises the issue). If only the parent is complaining then there should be a higher bar for proving harm.

  10. #850
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Highland Park, IL
    Posts
    14,382
    Mentioned
    994 Post(s)

    Random General Headlines

    No criminal statute requires or is defined by proof of harm.

    Isn't it hypocritical to redefine the legal age to have sex but not also redefine child labor laws? Old enough to have sex at 14, then aren't you also old enough to work on a farm picking blueberries for 10 hours per day? And why should we require them to stay in school? They're young adults, if they want to drop out at 14, go ahead. Who are we to stop them? Where's the proof of harm? Generations of people before WW II dropped out before age 14 to support their families. Young girls and arranged marriages at 12 in many countries. If they can have sex at 14, they can get pregnant, they should be able to get married, drop out, hold jobs, get sued, go to an adult prison ...

    (I'm being facetious, of course.)
    Last edited by allegro; 06-01-2013 at 06:43 PM.

  11. #851
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    1,957
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by allegro View Post
    It appears that this victim comes from a very Christian family concerned about protecting her "purity." They have freedom of religion; they feel it is their job to protect their daughter from losing her "purity" before it's time, and that is their constitutional right.
    Where are you getting this from?

  12. #852
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Highland Park, IL
    Posts
    14,382
    Mentioned
    994 Post(s)

    Random General Headlines

    Interviews with the parents, one of which was posted here.

    I think this purity stuff is crap, I think the basis of most organized religion is crap, but I'm not the majority. And statutory rape laws are intended to protect children from abuse, not protect their virginity. But the law is the law. And if the religious right wants to spin a law as being protected by freedom of religion, they'll mostly be successful at it. Because this is NOT a secular country.
    Last edited by allegro; 06-02-2013 at 03:55 PM.

  13. #853
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    In Flanders' fields
    Posts
    641
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    That's a fact. I'm amazed every day by how much the U.S. resembles a theocracy. It's mad.

  14. #854
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    GEORGIA - You're fucking welcome
    Posts
    2,822
    Mentioned
    74 Post(s)

    Random General Headlines

    Quote Originally Posted by Elke View Post
    That's a fact. I'm amazed every day by how much the U.S. resembles a theocracy. It's mad.
    There are people here that still believe no sex before marriage. That controlling all sexual urges is a virtue that brings you closer to God.

  15. #855
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    2,932
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    I'm fuckin' for freedom, then.

  16. #856
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Montreal, QC
    Posts
    2,649
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Minpin View Post

    it sounds like you're making a lot of assumptions, I don't know the specifics but the parents of the younger girl said this was a last resort. It's also a little silly to come out with a line like 'parents should do a better job at parenting'. What does that mean? In the next breath you criticise what a lot of people would consider parenting.
    It's fine. I'll gladly review my opinion if new facts come to light.
    Last edited by Deepvoid; 06-02-2013 at 11:42 AM.

  17. #857
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    In Flanders' fields
    Posts
    641
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dra508 View Post
    There are people here that still believe no sex before marriage. That controlling all sexual urges is a virtue that brings you closer to God.
    Well, there are plenty of people here who believe the same thing. But your child has to go to school until they're 18, and every school has to teach sex ed. And not the 'abstinence only' variety. So teachers can give their children every value they like at home, but the state is going to provide them with the info they need just in case.

  18. #858
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Montreal, QC
    Posts
    2,649
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    It should be noted that state senator Rep. Thad Altman voiced his opinion on changing the law and call this story a tragic situation.

  19. #859
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    In Flanders' fields
    Posts
    641
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    That's interesting, but not exactly relevant to the discussion, don't you think?

    edit: This was a reply to a link that is now gone. Hence its total lack of sensemaking. Sorry.
    Last edited by Elke; 06-03-2013 at 06:36 AM.

  20. #860
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Montreal, QC
    Posts
    2,649
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Elke View Post
    That's interesting, but not exactly relevant to the discussion, don't you think?
    You don't think the law should be changed in Florida in order to avoid another Kaitlyn Hunt story?

  21. #861
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Highland Park, IL
    Posts
    14,382
    Mentioned
    994 Post(s)
    Very interesting

    (It's a summary and discussion of this book.)

  22. #862
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Hamilton ON
    Posts
    1,813
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    All of the western wealth and power together in one room.

    Bilderberg 2013

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...g-2013-watford

  23. #863
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Hamilton ON
    Posts
    1,813
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Anyone following whats going on in turkey?


    http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/istan...20910054942116

  24. #864
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    4,210
    Mentioned
    174 Post(s)
    Been keeping an eye on the Turkey stuff. It's nuts. However, this awesome gif came from one of the videos: http://3.asset.soup.io/asset/4422/1811_e724_480.gif (linked cause it loads slow as hell)

  25. #865
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Hamilton ON
    Posts
    1,813
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    /\/\
    lol, at least some humour is coming out of this story.

    It's strange but not surprising reading media accounts of what is going on there. The Vice journalists there are reporting that this is a basic fight for freedom from oppression where oppossing groups are fighting side by side against the cops THEN you read the NY Times who say that this is just religious vs secular fight... they make no mention of the mall that was getting built in place of the park and instead say that the govt wanted to build a mosque.

  26. #866
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    480
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by mfte View Post
    It's strange but not surprising reading media accounts of what is going on there. The Vice journalists there are reporting that this is a basic fight for freedom from oppression where oppossing groups are fighting side by side against the cops THEN you read the NY Times who say that this is just religious vs secular fight... they make no mention of the mall that was getting built in place of the park and instead say that the govt wanted to build a mosque.
    From what I can gather from news outlets and a couple of Turkish friends I have, this particular thing started with the mall business (that was going to be built in the likeness of an older Ottoman military camp) but quickly escalated to a general uprising against the government. This is because for the past few years the government has slowly but steadily been working towards a more conservative, theocratic/moralistic regime. A law was passed that makes abortion really difficult unless there are serious health reasons, there has been a partial ban on the selling and advertising of alcohol (which, aside from the public feeling, could have reprecussions in tourist revenue and nightlife in general) and it appears there is also an attempt to ban kissing in public. These things, coupled with the general feeling that Erdogan is trying to restore some Ottoman grandeur in the state, is not sitting well at all with both traditional Kemalists and the more progressive, western-minded youth.

    It will be interesting to see how this pans out. On the one hand you have a powerful government with one of the most important prime-ministers in Turkey's history, who is credited with much of its economic development over the past 10 years. On the other hand, you have a disgruntled and diversified (and diversly disgruntled) populace that seem to have reached a crucial point in their tolerance of the government and Erdogan in particular.

  27. #867
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,722
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Mosque burned down right by my house

    Stunned!

  28. #868
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    1,957
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    So... Verizon is providing the NSA with daily logs of every single call made on its network, under court order made possible by the Patriot Act.

  29. #869
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    654
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)

  30. #870
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Hamilton ON
    Posts
    1,813
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jessamineny View Post
    So... Verizon is providing the NSA with daily logs of every single call made on its network, under court order made possible by the Patriot Act.
    Take it for what it's worth but I met a network engineer at my old job. He mentioned that he was at one point employed through contract by the US govt. He was telling me that the infrastructure they were designing was reeeeeeediculous. The amount of server space that was allocated for storing data was astronomical..... like they were preparing for something

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions