User talk:Leucosticte

Archives: User talk:Leucosticte/Archive 1

Click here to add a new topic.

Question

Because, you have been promoting sexual interaction with young children and though I am not sure if you yourself are serious about it, or are just expressing an extreme form of freedom of speech. I would just like to say that when you have a child with your girl/boy/transfriend, or however xhi likes to be called, please treat that child with love and care. Please for God's sake, don't force that child into anything before it reaches puberty. That includes sex. I am not saying this because I wish to oppress you, but because I care, as a human being, about your soul and it's place in the afterlife. I don't say this as a Catholic, Calvinist, Baptist, Jew or Lutheran, but simply as a religious person, who believes there is a moral authority that is simply good. Your friend --Redgreenfourties (talk) 18:25, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

I think most trauma from sexual interactions with children happen either when (1) the child says to stop, e.g. by crying, saying "no" or otherwise indicating displeasure, and the person continues anyway; or (2) the child is later told, and comes to believe, that he's been ruined, betrayed, etc. by what happened. It's not my intent to do anything that would be against a child's expressed wishes, aside from perhaps circumcision and other measures intended to preserve his well-being, and which can't be delayed until the age at which he can make a decision for himself; see my essay on the topic. Children can make sufficiently informed decisions about non-physically-harmful sexual acts from birth, though, because they understand innately whether a certain kind of touch is pleasurable or displeasurable and there is unlikely to be psychological traumatization in the very short interval between when the touch is initiated and when the child has an opportunity to object. Leucosticte (talk) 18:59, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Human sexuality is heavily conditioned socially. If you plan for you and your family to live outside of human society, you can ignore social conditions. Good luck finding a place to do that, because humans tend to take over the space, right? Given social conditions, and living in the United States, what you have written above, discovered years later under adverse conditions, could lead to the loss of custody of your children. Losing parents is generally traumatic for children.

The core of what you have written, though, "children can make sufficiently informed decisions about non-physically harmful sexual acts from birth," is something you made up, invented, and certainly not based on extensive interactions with small children. It's a sexual libertarian fantasy, and one that, acted out, would lead to heavy social sanction. Small children have practically no clue about sexuality, and generally treat whatever adults do with them as acceptable, if the adults are their caregivers. So any social worker seeing what you wrote will *assume* that you would test your theories, and that you are therefore a danger to children.

You do not know the full impact of sexual contact between children and adults, you imagine what it is, out of what you want to be true. I know of no culture that tolerates clear adult-child sex, that's probably a clue. But even if it were found that some did, that would not change the situation where you and your family live. --Abd (talk) 01:20, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, but what can I do. It's in my nature to defend liberty by posting commentary about my ideas, and to put those ideas into practice when I can and when there's even the slightest chance of getting away with it. I refuse to allow such an opportunity to pass by, merely because I was afraid of persecution being inflicted on me or others. I wrote about this at http://nathania.org/wiki/Miscellany:My_future Leucosticte (talk) 01:35, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

It's not in your "nature," Nathan, it's something you made up. And "getting away with it" betrays your attitude, and you have just acknowledged that you don't care who is harmed, which would include that child, and you value your ideas more than the child. You are not defending liberty, but license, or it's more complicated, you are setting yourself up for more "persecution," which, again you create. You are like someone who teases a bear, to see if they can "get away with it." Anyway, you've been informed, I'm out of here. --Abd (talk) 01:52, 5 May 2014 (UTC)