Why are there laws against paedophilia?

Post Reply New Topic

We women have the ancient Greeks to "thank" for the cultural expectation that we will shave our legs and armpits. And why did the Greeks begin that practice? So the brides would appear more like young boys, and their husbands could tolerate sleeping with them.

If your encyclopedia-like mind collected more facts than opinions, your perspective might be different. Luckily, *my* encyclopedia-like mind is quite resilient to BS statements.

Your (subtle) straw-manning of proponents of homosexual marriage as being proponents of child sexual abuse is BS. I am well aware that some idiots decided that they could find allies in NAMBLA. It is all on them, not the civilized people who believe that you should not condemn homosexuality because it does not fit easily within some fictional fairy tale...



More BS. I have already provided evidence on the psychological impact of child sexual abuse. No need to conjure "experimental" monstrosities.



Truth. There is no logical correlation between historical laws, current laws and whether something is right or wrong.



No, your claim is not supported by the actual research. Unless you can provide evidence that the Rind et al. study (and the studies which replicated its results) was scientifically unsound. The fact that the American Association for the Advancement of Science (the publishers of the Science journal) found no fault at all with the Rind study suggests that you might be facing an up-hill battle. Once again, the risk of being scientific is that you might challenge the conventional wisdom...



How quaint.

Last edited by GGPViper on 10 Oct 2012, 1:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I always assumed it had more to do with Estrogen causing less body hair to be grown, thus by being clean shaven, it appears to men as if you have an impossibly high level of estrogen and thus appear as a more fertile mate that is really naturally possible.

But that was always just an assumption. I have no facts on-hand to back it up.

Tell that to the boys that Sandusky sexually abused...

Btw, have you ever had to get CITI Certification and then approval for testing on human beings? I have, and it is a flippin pain in the neck even when there is next to no chance for the test subjects to suffer any injury. The fact a test of as to whether or not this would not hurt children depending on upbringing would not ever be approved because these restrictions are pretty strict to start with, and it gets exponentially more stringent when the test subject is a child.

Cherry picking fallacy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_pic ... fallacy%29



As there is no need to conduct experiments to assess the effects of child sexual abuse (just as there is no need to douse people in kerosene and lighting them on fire to assess the effects of burns on the flesh) I consider this particular post irrelevant.



I made a mistake in that post. The American Association for the Advancement of Science did not find any fault with the Rind study (which only supports my claim even further). The APA didn't either (obviously, as they were the ones publishing it in the first place). I have edited my previous post, and I apologize for the erroneous content.

First of all, young girls do not have leg hair either! Even if they were the first, the connection between ancient Greek female shaving and modern female shaving has been interrupted by ~2000 years. Modern female shaving(legs and pits) began in the early 1920s when women were finally allowed to show their legs and wear sleeveless clothing for the first time in more that 1000 YEARS!


Also, it was common practice for ancient Egyptian women to remove all of their body hair.

sexual preference for those things have changed and fluctuated throughout cultures and time

There's a photo of Katherine Hepburn ('The most beautiful woman in the world' in her time) in a knee-length dress floating around somewhere, sitting on a rock in the sun somewhere, and it's evident that she hadn't shaved her legs. She's still gorgeous.

The recent trend towards pre-pubescent levels of body hair on both men and women is more than a little creepy to me. Shave your armpits? Sure, they get a little stinky if you don't. Shave your legs? If you want to. Wax your eyebrows, your legs, your genitals, your back, etc...? Not attractive to me, in the clinical sense with which I see other women or in the more interested sense with which I look at men.

Really? A quick Google image search, doesn't bring that many hits that show her legs. But in the one that do, her legs look pretty smooth.

Anecdotal.

I've looked for it, too; I saw it years ago, in the 'Time' retrospective, and noticed it then. Haven't seen it since. Her legs do look smooth, but when you have light-colored hair it doesn't show much on your arms and legs unless the light is pretty high.

So? This isn't a thesis defense, it's a casual discussion.

Most discussions on this board are supposedly casual, yet for the most part certain members seem intent on dredging up statistics and dismissing other's claims as anecdotal, figured I may as well do the same.

lol

Hey, anecdotal evidence IS evidence. I understand the veracity of scientific evidence, sure, but that doesn't help inform me of how something affects someone on a personal, emotional level.

as long as you qualify the quality of that evidence then you would be absolutely right.