Why's an adult and child having sex bad? (rings Pavlovian bell)

[Delta4Embassy]

Funny how while some responses were well written and well thought out replies, none addressed the actual OP.

Forget the title of the OP and the triggering body and instead think about how you felt reading it. Now ask yourselves WHY you have such a heated reaction.

No children are being protected by a respondant getting pissed off. No children are under threat by the words and writing. Yet responses are suggestive of those things. Why?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The psychologist Pavlov conditioned dogs to expect food when they hear a bell rung. (Where dinner bells and salivating at the sound of one comes from.)

I know certain words, subjects, and ideas evoke a similar response. Abortion, pedophilia, conservative, liberal, communist, socialist, Obama, etc. are examples of some currenty ones.

If you don't understand that you've been conditioned to react in a predictable way to certain triggers you're in effect mentally ill because you're reacting without thinking.

Can replace the title with any other other triggers and we'd be talking about the same thing.

 

[Moonglow]

Oh for the love of christ delta...

Now, before your heads explode or you slip and fall salivating let me explain the complete question.

Seeing only the title of this thread, your heartrate likely quickened, the blood in your body flowed around faster, your adrenaline began to pump and you basicly became very excited. But why?

Why are people's reaction to questions of this type so predictable? Is the answer objectively and irrefutably known? Is the answer, "because it's bad." or "because it's illegal." or something else?

If we read a news headline about some adult getting busted for having sex with a minor most of us start imagining ways to execute or violently punish the perpetrator. But does that same reaction occur if we read a headline about a typical New York City mugging, or robbery, or petty theft? Probably not if only because those don't often become headlines at all. Did any of us ever imagine creative ways to execute a purse-snatcher?

If a majority of people in the USA are religious, and of those the majority is some sort of Christian, then the majority should have no objections whatsoever to adults and children having sex together. In fact, while the Bible forbids many things, it seems to have forgotten about adults and children having sex. In Jewish tradition, and upheld through the centuries, the age at which a Jewish boy can consent to marriage (and thus sex) is 13, and girls at 12. If we run with the narrative this means a Jew centuries old (Moses lived to be 800) can marry a girl of 12.

While many things upset God, none do so more than robbery (say theft with violence.) This angers God so much He wiped out every living thing on the planet except for Noah, his family, and some animals. But there are numerous passages condoning rape, enslavement of girls, and even murder of girls and boys of "children's" ages. But no where does it say you can't have sex with them.

So why is the public reaction to headlines about adult-child sex such a hot button if most are of a religion that doesn't have a problem with that? And if not a person who believes in gods, many of us still have a problem with it. But in our case, why?

Some scientists have pointed out that our brains don't finish maturing and developing until we're in our 20s. But if we use that fact as the basis for our objections, then the age for sexual consent should be 20-25. And a problem with it is this: if we use mental maturity and brain development, what about the very old and neurlogically impaired, what about mentally handicapped people, and others who simply exhibit lower-than-chronological-aged IQs? Should you have some minimum IQ before you're granted certain legal rights? And then of course is the problem with how we're letting 'mentally impaired' people drive at 16.

The fact remains we have an irrational, almost automatic, and predictable response to adults and children having sex together. Whether they did or not, the merest possibility is enough to set our reaction in motion.

We only do things we've been taught to do, or learned to do on our own, have been conditioned to do, or have an instinctual impetus for doing. We learn best and the most by imitation. As such we learn how to speak listening to parents speak, and how to do various things by watching and imitating/repeating them. If people's reactions to certain things are easily predictable isn't it that they've been conditioned to do them and thus are predictable?

Any human easy to predict is easy to manipulate. That's not a good thing. Think about it. This wasn't about whether adults having sex with kids is bad. It was about how you react to it and other questions.

 

[Muhammed]

Can you say sexual predator.

 

[Slyhunter]

The French believe that girls, left on their own, to discover sex with awkward boys could ruin them. They believe it's more viable to have an experienced man teach a girl how to have sex then once she has experience she can turn around and teach the other boys her age. That way her first encounter can be a good experience instead of an awkward painful one it would be with a virginal male.

 

[Judicial review]

Delta4Embassy you keep posting and thinking about this shit it will turn to action and your life will be ruined. You need to stop it for your sake immediately.

 

[Muhammed]

The fact remains we have an irrational, almost automatic, and predictable response to adults and children having sex together. Whether they did or not, the merest possibility is enough to set our reaction in motion.

It's hard wired into most human beings to want to protect the young. Let's say the age of consent was 13. I don't know many men who would have a change of heart and say "Well cool, I can go have sex with 13 year olds now!!!!" It's not who we are as a species. This is not to say that a lot of men wouldn't go out and pursue little girls/boys. Those men are sexual deviants. They will always exist, but it's not the norm.

Society hasn't conditioned me to not sexually desire children, I wasn't told "Chris you shouldn't have sex with underage children, it's bad!" There came a time in my life when I became aware of the innocence of children (17-18 years old?) My hormones were raging, but at no point did I ever think about being with a little 12/13/14 year old girl. Again society didn't tell me that, it just wasn't in me. I had ZERO desire. I think that is the case with most males/females.

The reaction to pedophiles is predictable, because as a species we are hard wired to protect the young from such acts. Sex is a very intimate and powerful act and most healthy adults understand this. It's deviant behavior to desire young children. Plain and simple.

To answer your question, the reaction is predictable because the behavior is abhorrent to normal, healthy, functioning adults. Society doesn't say so, who we are as a species says so.

I've noticed that who I'm attracted to has also changed as I've gotten older. When I was 20, I could never imagine being attracted to a 40 year old man. When I was 40, I couldn't imagine being attracted to a 20-year-old. My attraction has consistently been to men who are in my same age group. I can see that someone who is young is physically beautiful or handsome, but I'm not sexually interested in them. I think that when people's attraction sticks for some reason, that's because they are in some way deviant. It's not normal. There is something in our wiring that causes our physical attraction to follow our maturity process.

I'm still sexually attracted to college cheerleaders. I'm 50 years old and most 50 year old women are a big turn off to me. I'm going to be single for the rest of my life unless I win the lottery.

I'm 48 and I married a hot 24 year old college student last year. And we have a baby who will be a year old in September. I don't play the lottery but I certainly feel like I've won the lottery.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The French believe that girls, left on their own, to discover sex with awkward boys could ruin them. They believe it's more viable to have an experienced man teach a girl how to have sex then once she has experience she can turn around and teach the other boys her age. That way her first encounter can be a good experience instead of an awkward painful one it would be with a virginal male.

While I see the logic of that, think there are better ways to go about it. Instead of making sex taboo and thus a mystery people are nervous about, raise kids with the natural naked human form and option to view pornography at their leisure. Making nudity taboo and linking it to sex, just makes people more eager to see someone naked. Makes them more ashamed of their own nakedness too. Dispel the mystery and you solve many problems with self-image issues. Let young people view porn and not only do they then see what all the fuss was about, but can maybe resist the temptations to have sex when that comes up by not having made it into this big thing in their imaginations. Sure it feels good, but so does your own hand or a vibrator.

Always liked thinking of the scene in Star Wars when Obi-Wan gives Luke his father's lightsaber,

"Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough..."

Mothers should give their daughters a vibrator when they're old enough too, and fathers their sons a well made porno and bottle of lotion. Far better to encourage your own kids to masturbate and satisfy their desires on their own then not bring it up and hope for the best. The best never happens. Best case is they learn to be comfortable masturbating, are free to pleasure themselves as needed, and thus aren't looking at other people as a means to an end.

 

[Muhammed]

The French believe that girls, left on their own, to discover sex with awkward boys could ruin them. They believe it's more viable to have an experienced man teach a girl how to have sex then once she has experience she can turn around and teach the other boys her age. That way her first encounter can be a good experience instead of an awkward painful one it would be with a virginal male.

While I see the logic of that, think there are better ways to go about it. Instead of making sex taboo and thus a mystery people are nervous about, raise kids with the natural naked human form and option to view pornography at their leisure. Making nudity taboo and linking it to sex, just makes people more eager to see someone naked. Makes them more ashamed of their own nakedness too. Dispel the mystery and you solve many problems with self-image issues. Let young people view porn and not only do they then see what all the fuss was about, but can maybe resist the temptations to have sex when that comes up by not having made it into this big thing in their imaginations. Sure it feels good, but so does your own hand or a vibrator.

Always liked thinking of the scene in Star Wars when Obi-Wan gives Luke his father's lightsaber,

"Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough..."

Mothers should give their daughters a vibrator when they're old enough too, and fathers their sons a well made porno and bottle of lotion. Far better to encourage your own kids to masturbate and satisfy their desires on their own then not bring it up and hope for the best. The best never happens. Best case is they learn to be comfortable masturbating, are free to pleasure themselves as needed, and thus aren't looking at other people as a means to an end.

I have 5 daughters who are in their 20s. When the hormones first start kicking in they don't need any "encouragement" to masturbate. And they don't need a vibrator either. They have fingers.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The French believe that girls, left on their own, to discover sex with awkward boys could ruin them. They believe it's more viable to have an experienced man teach a girl how to have sex then once she has experience she can turn around and teach the other boys her age. That way her first encounter can be a good experience instead of an awkward painful one it would be with a virginal male.

While I see the logic of that, think there are better ways to go about it. Instead of making sex taboo and thus a mystery people are nervous about, raise kids with the natural naked human form and option to view pornography at their leisure. Making nudity taboo and linking it to sex, just makes people more eager to see someone naked. Makes them more ashamed of their own nakedness too. Dispel the mystery and you solve many problems with self-image issues. Let young people view porn and not only do they then see what all the fuss was about, but can maybe resist the temptations to have sex when that comes up by not having made it into this big thing in their imaginations. Sure it feels good, but so does your own hand or a vibrator.

Always liked thinking of the scene in Star Wars when Obi-Wan gives Luke his father's lightsaber,

"Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough..."

Mothers should give their daughters a vibrator when they're old enough too, and fathers their sons a well made porno and bottle of lotion. Far better to encourage your own kids to masturbate and satisfy their desires on their own then not bring it up and hope for the best. The best never happens. Best case is they learn to be comfortable masturbating, are free to pleasure themselves as needed, and thus aren't looking at other people as a means to an end.

I have 5 daughters who are in their 20s. When the hormones first start kicking in they don't need any "encouragement" to masturbate. And they don't need a vibrator either. They have fingers.

Be stunned how many women write in to sex help websites complaining about not knowing how to masturbate, how to orgasm, or report on all the shame they feel about it.

Never assume kids will figure it out left to their own devices.

 

[Muhammed]

The French believe that girls, left on their own, to discover sex with awkward boys could ruin them. They believe it's more viable to have an experienced man teach a girl how to have sex then once she has experience she can turn around and teach the other boys her age. That way her first encounter can be a good experience instead of an awkward painful one it would be with a virginal male.

While I see the logic of that, think there are better ways to go about it. Instead of making sex taboo and thus a mystery people are nervous about, raise kids with the natural naked human form and option to view pornography at their leisure. Making nudity taboo and linking it to sex, just makes people more eager to see someone naked. Makes them more ashamed of their own nakedness too. Dispel the mystery and you solve many problems with self-image issues. Let young people view porn and not only do they then see what all the fuss was about, but can maybe resist the temptations to have sex when that comes up by not having made it into this big thing in their imaginations. Sure it feels good, but so does your own hand or a vibrator.

Always liked thinking of the scene in Star Wars when Obi-Wan gives Luke his father's lightsaber,

"Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough..."

Mothers should give their daughters a vibrator when they're old enough too, and fathers their sons a well made porno and bottle of lotion. Far better to encourage your own kids to masturbate and satisfy their desires on their own then not bring it up and hope for the best. The best never happens. Best case is they learn to be comfortable masturbating, are free to pleasure themselves as needed, and thus aren't looking at other people as a means to an end.

I have 5 daughters who are in their 20s. When the hormones first start kicking in they don't need any "encouragement" to masturbate. And they don't need a vibrator either. They have fingers.

Be stunned how many women write in to sex help websites complaining about not knowing how to masturbate, how to orgasm, or report on all the shame they feel about it.

Never assume kids will figure it out left to their own devices.

How many kids do you have? I would guess zero.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The French believe that girls, left on their own, to discover sex with awkward boys could ruin them. They believe it's more viable to have an experienced man teach a girl how to have sex then once she has experience she can turn around and teach the other boys her age. That way her first encounter can be a good experience instead of an awkward painful one it would be with a virginal male.

While I see the logic of that, think there are better ways to go about it. Instead of making sex taboo and thus a mystery people are nervous about, raise kids with the natural naked human form and option to view pornography at their leisure. Making nudity taboo and linking it to sex, just makes people more eager to see someone naked. Makes them more ashamed of their own nakedness too. Dispel the mystery and you solve many problems with self-image issues. Let young people view porn and not only do they then see what all the fuss was about, but can maybe resist the temptations to have sex when that comes up by not having made it into this big thing in their imaginations. Sure it feels good, but so does your own hand or a vibrator.

Always liked thinking of the scene in Star Wars when Obi-Wan gives Luke his father's lightsaber,

"Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough..."

Mothers should give their daughters a vibrator when they're old enough too, and fathers their sons a well made porno and bottle of lotion. Far better to encourage your own kids to masturbate and satisfy their desires on their own then not bring it up and hope for the best. The best never happens. Best case is they learn to be comfortable masturbating, are free to pleasure themselves as needed, and thus aren't looking at other people as a means to an end.

I have 5 daughters who are in their 20s. When the hormones first start kicking in they don't need any "encouragement" to masturbate. And they don't need a vibrator either. They have fingers.

Be stunned how many women write in to sex help websites complaining about not knowing how to masturbate, how to orgasm, or report on all the shame they feel about it.

Never assume kids will figure it out left to their own devices.

How many kids do you have? I would guess zero.

Correct. But if that invalidates reason, ask yourself why so many men are gynecologists.

 

[Muhammed]

The French believe that girls, left on their own, to discover sex with awkward boys could ruin them. They believe it's more viable to have an experienced man teach a girl how to have sex then once she has experience she can turn around and teach the other boys her age. That way her first encounter can be a good experience instead of an awkward painful one it would be with a virginal male.

While I see the logic of that, think there are better ways to go about it. Instead of making sex taboo and thus a mystery people are nervous about, raise kids with the natural naked human form and option to view pornography at their leisure. Making nudity taboo and linking it to sex, just makes people more eager to see someone naked. Makes them more ashamed of their own nakedness too. Dispel the mystery and you solve many problems with self-image issues. Let young people view porn and not only do they then see what all the fuss was about, but can maybe resist the temptations to have sex when that comes up by not having made it into this big thing in their imaginations. Sure it feels good, but so does your own hand or a vibrator.

Always liked thinking of the scene in Star Wars when Obi-Wan gives Luke his father's lightsaber,

"Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough..."

Mothers should give their daughters a vibrator when they're old enough too, and fathers their sons a well made porno and bottle of lotion. Far better to encourage your own kids to masturbate and satisfy their desires on their own then not bring it up and hope for the best. The best never happens. Best case is they learn to be comfortable masturbating, are free to pleasure themselves as needed, and thus aren't looking at other people as a means to an end.

I have 5 daughters who are in their 20s. When the hormones first start kicking in they don't need any "encouragement" to masturbate. And they don't need a vibrator either. They have fingers.

Be stunned how many women write in to sex help websites complaining about not knowing how to masturbate, how to orgasm, or report on all the shame they feel about it.

Never assume kids will figure it out left to their own devices.

How many kids do you have? I would guess zero.

Correct. But if that invalidates reason, ask yourself why so many men are gynecologists.

You speak from the pulpit of ignorance.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

While I see the logic of that, think there are better ways to go about it. Instead of making sex taboo and thus a mystery people are nervous about, raise kids with the natural naked human form and option to view pornography at their leisure. Making nudity taboo and linking it to sex, just makes people more eager to see someone naked. Makes them more ashamed of their own nakedness too. Dispel the mystery and you solve many problems with self-image issues. Let young people view porn and not only do they then see what all the fuss was about, but can maybe resist the temptations to have sex when that comes up by not having made it into this big thing in their imaginations. Sure it feels good, but so does your own hand or a vibrator.

Always liked thinking of the scene in Star Wars when Obi-Wan gives Luke his father's lightsaber,

"Your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough..."

Mothers should give their daughters a vibrator when they're old enough too, and fathers their sons a well made porno and bottle of lotion. Far better to encourage your own kids to masturbate and satisfy their desires on their own then not bring it up and hope for the best. The best never happens. Best case is they learn to be comfortable masturbating, are free to pleasure themselves as needed, and thus aren't looking at other people as a means to an end.

I have 5 daughters who are in their 20s. When the hormones first start kicking in they don't need any "encouragement" to masturbate. And they don't need a vibrator either. They have fingers.

Be stunned how many women write in to sex help websites complaining about not knowing how to masturbate, how to orgasm, or report on all the shame they feel about it.

Never assume kids will figure it out left to their own devices.

How many kids do you have? I would guess zero.

Correct. But if that invalidates reason, ask yourself why so many men are gynecologists.

You speak from the pulpit of ignorance.

No. I speak utilizing the wisdom of others as does everyone learned. We learn from someone else who knows things thenr epeat what we've learned.

Having children doesn't mean you're a good parent simply by virtue of having had children.

 

[cereal_killer]

The psychologist Pavlov conditioned dogs to expect food when they hear a bell rung. (Where dinner bells and salivating at the sound of one comes from.)

I know certain words, subjects, and ideas evoke a similar response. Abortion, pedophilia, conservative, liberal, communist, socialist, Obama, etc. are examples of some currenty ones.

If you don't understand that you've been conditioned to react in a predictable way to certain triggers you're in effect mentally ill because you're reacting without thinking.

Can replace the title with any other other triggers and we'd be talking about the same thing.

Delta you are totally ignoring what a lot of us have said (the ones who have taken the time to address the OP and that includes me). You can't lump pedophilia in with how people respond to liberal talking points, conservative talking points, socialism, Obama etc etc. Do you see how that is just ludicrous?

People aren't fed images/stories of pedophilia and told to respond with anger or any other strong emotion. It's an automatic response. It's neither learned or programmed into adults. It's instinct. Just as a mother/father will leap to their feet to save their child(ren) from a life threatening situation. It's automatic, a reflex if you will. Adults aren't taught "Ok, when your child is in danger, you do everything you can to protect them. OK? Jump up and immediately go to their rescue." No dude it's automatic.

You keep saying that anyone who responds in disgust/anger/hatred/rage to PEDOPHILIA has been conditioned to react this way. What this tells me is that you don't have that filter that most healthy functioning adults have. You don't see or understand that sex is a very powerful and intimate act. Sex impacts us all even as adults. It's one of the most powerful acts we can engage in with another human being. When used as a weapon (rape, pedo) it has devastating effects. Not because society or their parents conditioned them. That's a ridiculous statement

 

[Delta4Embassy]

The psychologist Pavlov conditioned dogs to expect food when they hear a bell rung. (Where dinner bells and salivating at the sound of one comes from.)

I know certain words, subjects, and ideas evoke a similar response. Abortion, pedophilia, conservative, liberal, communist, socialist, Obama, etc. are examples of some currenty ones.

If you don't understand that you've been conditioned to react in a predictable way to certain triggers you're in effect mentally ill because you're reacting without thinking.

Can replace the title with any other other triggers and we'd be talking about the same thing.

Delta you are totally ignoring what a lot of us have said (the ones who have taken the time to address the OP and that includes me). You can't lump pedophilia in with how people respond to liberal talking points, conservative talking points, socialism, Obama etc etc. Do you see how that is just ludicrous?

People aren't fed images/stories of pedophilia and told to respond with anger or any other strong emotion. It's an automatic response. It's neither learned or programmed into adults. It's instinct. Just as a mother/father will leap to their feet to save their child(ren) from a life threatening situation. It's automatic, a reflex if you will. Adults aren't taught "Ok, when your child is in danger, you do everything you can to protect them. OK? Jump up and immediately go to their rescue." No dude it's automatic.

You keep saying that anyone who responds in disgust/anger/hatred/rage to PEDOPHILIA has been conditioned to react this way. What this tells me is that you don't have that filter that most healthy functioning adults have. You don't see or understand that sex is a very powerful and intimate act. Sex impacts us all even as adults. It's one of the most powerful acts we can engage in with another human being. When used as a weapon (rape, pedo) it has devastating effects. Not because society or their parents conditioned them. That's a ridiculous statement

Didn't respond to what ya'll wrote because what you all wrote wasn't about what I was writing about. You focused on what you saw, not what I wanted you all to consider. Thereby confirming my assertion. People see a triggering word and automatically react without thinking.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

What'd ya all think the Pavlovian bell reference in the very title was for?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

To put it another way, think about how soldiers in combat say they dont' think but revert to their training doing things very rapidly but without a lot of deliberate thought. That's what's happening here.

You're all seeing the pedophilia angle and quit thinking focusing on that instead of asking why it's a triggering word for you at all.

 

[cereal_killer]

Based on what you wrote, it's pretty clear what you wanted us to consider. You're making no sense at all at this point.

D4: "What color is the sky?"
Member: "Well...it's blue"
D4: "Quit focusing on the color of the sky, instead focus on why it triggered the color blue"
Member: "Well because you asked what color it was"
D4: "You focused on what you saw, not what I wanted you to consider"

...when I can't make sense of wtf somebody is asking without my decoder ring, its time for me to leave. L8r......

So why is the public reaction to headlines about adult-child sex such a hot button if most are of a religion that doesn't have a problem with that? And if not a person who believes in gods, many of us still have a problem with it. But in our case, why?

If people's reactions to certain things are easily predictable isn't it that they've been conditioned to do them and thus are predictable?

Why are people's reaction to questions of this type so predictable? Is the answer objectively and irrefutably known? Is the answer, "because it's bad." or "because it's illegal." or something else?

If a majority of people in the USA are religious, and of those the majority is some sort of Christian, then the majority should have no objections whatsoever to adults and children having sex together.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Based on what you wrote, it's pretty clear what you wanted us to consider. You're making no sense at all at this point.

D4: "What color is the sky?"
Member: "Well...it's blue"
D4: "Quit focusing on the color of the sky, instead focus on why it triggered the color blue"
Member: "Well because you asked what color it was"
D4: "You focused on what you saw, not what I wanted you to consider"

...when I can't make sense of wtf somebody is asking without my decoder ring, its time for me to leave. L8r......

So why is the public reaction to headlines about adult-child sex such a hot button if most are of a religion that doesn't have a problem with that? And if not a person who believes in gods, many of us still have a problem with it. But in our case, why?

If people's reactions to certain things are easily predictable isn't it that they've been conditioned to do them and thus are predictable?

Why are people's reaction to questions of this type so predictable? Is the answer objectively and irrefutably known? Is the answer, "because it's bad." or "because it's illegal." or something else?

If a majority of people in the USA are religious, and of those the majority is some sort of Christian, then the majority should have no objections whatsoever to adults and children having sex together.

I didn't put things as well as I did in the 'Triggers...' thread. So it's a fair point here.

But your insistance in sticking to the example trigger proves my point. People's reactions to triggers like that reveals a conditioning has taken place unless they have actual experience with it.

Through media, we're being conditioned to think specific ways about specific things. There is no inbuilt, biological response to pedophilia. Because desiring prepubescnet-aged kids isn't natural or biologicaly sound - they're not reproductive-age so there's no reason the human animal should desire them. And yet many of us have a very definite response to just the word. But if no experiences with it, the only reason we know anything at all about it comes from how it's portrayed in media. As with Muslims, political parties, names, and so on.

Everything we know and think comes from somewhere. We don't get the hereditary knowledge like some insects. We have to be taught and learn about everything.

Our PC culture has elimnated most everything we used to be able to mock and disparage with a very few exceptions. Pedophilia remains one of the things we're still 'allowed' to mock, disparage, and even threaten without affecting our reputations as 'good' people. No one faults someone who says a pedophile should be murdered. And yet with no first-hand experieces with them, it's a curiously intense response. Until you consider how the response has been learned.

Just as no child is born racist and picks that up from parents, peers, and local community (as they do their speaking accents,) no one's born hating anyone at all. Hate is a learned response. MY intent is not to defend the indefensible or suggest hating pedophiles is wrong, but I would say that when people are prone to being able to freely hate others, rarely does it end with one group.