Debate and Discussion

If the vaccines really work...
kyupol at 2:05PM, Aug. 27, 2009
(offline)
posts: 3,713
joined: 1-12-2006
First of all, this thread isn't here to argue whether or not vaccines work. I understand to alot of people, the vaccine is like some sort of magical elixir of protection given to them by their gods, the big pharma boys.

I understand your faith. I respect your religion so if you wanna believe in the magical elixir of protection, thats fine.

What I'm trying to argue is the case against MANDATORY / FORCED INOCULATION.

Lets say its true that vaccines do work. If you take it, you shouldn't worry about others not taking it because by doing so, you are protected. Because it works, all those fools who refuse to take the vaccine will be infected and will not be saved. Afterall, you're safe. You're protected because of the vaccine.

Because you are protected, you have nothing to worry about even if someone with the dreaded swine flu will cough in front of you.

But why this forced inoculation?

http://news.google.ca/news/search?pz=1&ned=ca&hl=en&q=forced+inoculation

What happened to respect for human rights and the freedom of choice?

Do you want some strange religion to be forced down your throat?

But why is this religion of vaccination being forced down other people's throats?

What happened to do unto others what you want others to do unto you?
NOW UPDATING!!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:26PM
Hawk at 2:33PM, Aug. 27, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,760
joined: 1-2-2006
You know what I haven't heard of in a long time? Smallpox. You know why? Vaccinations wiped it out. You're free to refuse vaccinations, Kyupol. But don't pretend that one of the most horrible diseases in human history wasn't eradicated by this practice.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:46PM
imshard at 7:09PM, Aug. 27, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,961
joined: 7-26-2007
Like anything else it should be moderated. Trying to vaccinate everybody for everything is costly and ineffective and vaccine quality standards have dropped significantly in recent years. Some Vaccines are quite detrimental. My own mother is partly paralyzed because of a bad batch of polio vaccine. Some case studies show that abnormal concentrations in some vaccines lead to higher rates of autism and mental retardation in some children. Many flu seasons go by where the vaccine is not the correct strain, or its not properly treated and directly infects the treated cases.

On the flip side it is a valuable medical tool that has saved literally billions of lives and many impoverished nations suffer greatly from lack of medical treatment including vaccinations. Spreading dirty unverified rumors spreads disease and “poison needle” urban legends that have a negative effect on improving the standard of living and general public health of untreated populations.

Should it be forced though? No it shouldn't. I have never been immunized and never been the worse for it. Like any medical procedure it should always be fully consenting.
Don't be a stick in the mud traditionalist! Support global warming!

Tech Support: The Comic!! Updates Somedays!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:59PM
qqq at 11:09PM, Aug. 27, 2009
(offline)
posts: 122
joined: 8-10-2009
It's forced for the same reason that children can't watch 18+ material. That people in most countries can't own guns. That you can't drink alcohol under a certain age, and that you can't do drugs.

It's forced for the reason that some where high up are popularly elected officials who think they know what's best for you regardless of ever having met you and fail to appreciate that people are all different. And I think it's wrong.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
ozoneocean at 1:06AM, Aug. 28, 2009
(online)
posts: 25,056
joined: 1-2-2004
imshard
My own mother is partly paralyzed because of a bad batch of polio vaccine.
That's very sad. But I know a lot of older people who spent most of their young lives in iron lungs and have withered, damaged limbs because they didn't have the polio vaccine when they were young. :(

———-
The idea behind universal vaccination is that it only works if it's done that way. There is no point in faffing around discussing partial stuff and choice etc blah blah blah. Obviously you don't understand the concept and there's a hell of a lot of people who think the same.

What would ultimately be best for the whole human race is if we took those scared worry-warts who don't like this and don't like that and put them on their own isolated little island somewhere. Then we could totally wipe out all the viruses and things that we can vaccinate against without fear that the recalcitrants will yet again incubate the bloody stuff and keep on reintroducing it to the rest of us, rendering all the money and effort and bother we've put into vaccination completely useless and meaning we'll all have to keep on continuing to vaccinate against easily preventable viruses for generations to come.

Fail. Fail utterly. T____T

————————

Now, of course universal world vaccination is utterly impossible anyway, so don't bother to pick me up on that. We don't live in bubbles and the expense and effort is beyond us all regardless. BUT, reasonably thorough “universal” vaccination is still possible and works excellently and that means you DON'T have to keep vaccinating against the things generation after generation if enough people get the initial vaccinations. The problems arise when idiot fearmongering results in too large an amount of people avoiding them. So if you're an idiot fear-mongerer, you're not just exercising your “freedom” and expressing your god-given opinions, NO. What you are doing is actively crapping in my backyard and offensively acting antisocially against the rest of the human race as a species.

If you don't want to be a part of this human civilisation. GTFO.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:35PM
qqq at 1:33AM, Aug. 28, 2009
(offline)
posts: 122
joined: 8-10-2009
ozoneocean
imshard
My own mother is partly paralyzed because of a bad batch of polio vaccine.
That's very sad. But I know a lot of older people who spent most of their young lives in iron lungs and have withered, damaged limbs because they didn't have the polio vaccine when they were young. :(

———-
The idea behind universal vaccination is that it only works if it's done that way. There is no point in faffing around discussing partial stuff and choice etc blah blah blah. Obviously you don't understand the concept and there's a hell of a lot of people who think the same.

What would ultimately be best for the whole human race is if we took those scared worry-warts who don't like this and don't like that and put them on their own isolated little island somewhere. Then we could totally wipe out all the viruses and things that we can vaccinate against without fear that the recalcitrants will yet again incubate the bloody stuff and keep on reintroducing it to the rest of us, rendering all the money and effort and bother we've put into vaccination completely useless and meaning we'll all have to keep on continuing to vaccinate against easily preventable viruses for generations to come.

Fail. Fail utterly. T____T

————————

Now, of course universal world vaccination is utterly impossible anyway, so don't bother to pick me up on that. We don't live in bubbles and the expense and effort is beyond us all regardless. BUT, reasonably thorough “universal” vaccination is still possible and works excellently and that means you DON'T have to keep vaccinating against the things generation after generation if enough people get the initial vaccinations. The problems arise when idiot fearmongering results in too large an amount of people avoiding them. So if you're an idiot fear-mongerer, you're not just exercising your “freedom” and expressing your god-given opinions, NO. What you are doing is actively crapping in my backyard and offensively acting antisocially against the rest of the human race as a species.

If you don't want to be a part of this human civilisation. GTFO.
I hear you, but the same can be said about not forcing intelligent people with the due capabilities to rule if they don't want to. Or forcing people with a brilliance in engineering to go do that, instead of persuing their dream of being a sculptor.

The darn thing about life it's that it's so complex and no problem has a solution except the most elemental things like advanced mathematics.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
Faliat at 4:52AM, Aug. 28, 2009
(online)
posts: 582
joined: 10-17-2006
We need vaccinations in case another major pandemic like Spanish Flu strikes again. It killed 100 million people and infected 500 million at a time when the population of earth was only one and a half billion. And, if that zombie simulator I found is accurate enough, more people means more infections and a faster spread. So if it happens again and nobody deals with it, it could wipe out a billion easy.

And then there's your children. If a mother is vaccinated her breastmilk can also provide immunity for the child against that disease although not as much as the vaccination itself would have, but still a considerable amount.

Sure, I doubt some vaccinations. I've not had any vaccinations I should have had 5 years ago but was off sick at the time and I'll be trying to get those soon. But there's just some illness. I know there can be some bad batches of vaccinations. But it's a small percantage compared to the many people who would get the disease and potentially suffer for the rest fo their lives afterwards.

And here's one last thing. Autism.

I'm so sick of people blaming vaccines for the damn thing that I don't even know where to BEGIN on that shit! I hated that association even before I was diagnosed with what most people consider a mild variant.
I could rant forever on that, so I'll save it for another thread.

Call that jumped up metal rod a knife?
Watch mine go straight through a kevlar table, and if it dunt do the same to a certain gaixan's skull in my immediate vicinity after, I GET A F*****G REFUND! BUKKO, AH?!

- Rekkiy (NerveWire)
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:25PM
BffSatan at 6:11PM, Aug. 28, 2009
(online)
posts: 1,478
joined: 3-2-2008
Vaccines usually work, but no, they should not be forced.
Vaccines can have side effects, when I was younger I became incredibly ill after a whooping cough vaccination.
It's a civil right to decide not to be vaccinated.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:21AM
isukun at 6:19PM, Aug. 29, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
You usually get sick to some degree after every vaccine. Sometimes it is not noticeable, other times it is more noticeable, but it is almost always to a lesser degree than what you'd get if you caught the actual disease. It's all part of the process vaccines use to build antibodies.

Personally, I have to agree with ozoneocean on this one. The world is much healthier today than it was 100 years ago, and much of that is due to vaccines virtually wiping out particularly virulent diseases of the past. I do not object to mandatory vaccinations simply BECAUSE there are people out there who insist anything the government does must be bad and will reject these treatments allowing these diseases to persist and flushing a lot of my tax money down the drain.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
manicmerganser at 10:29AM, Aug. 31, 2009
(offline)
posts: 54
joined: 8-10-2009
Do you people feel the same way about autism and vaccines? its ben in the news a lot lately thanks to miss Jenny Mcarthy.
www.alannispoliticalcart00ns.blogspot.com
http://1-art-1.deviantart.com/
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:51PM
therealtj at 3:28PM, Aug. 31, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,282
joined: 3-15-2007
qqq
It's forced for the same reason that children can't watch 18+ material. That people in most countries can't own guns. That you can't drink alcohol under a certain age, and that you can't do drugs.

It's forced for the reason that some where high up are popularly elected officials who think they know what's best for you regardless of ever having met you and fail to appreciate that people are all different. And I think it's wrong.
Are you saying children should watch porn?

“The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter Q into a privet bush, but unfortunately there are times when it is unavoidable.”
-Douglas Adams, The Restaurant At the End of the Universe
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:28PM
isukun at 11:47PM, Aug. 31, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
Yes, because access to porn is the real problem with that statement.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
qqq at 2:45AM, Sept. 1, 2009
(offline)
posts: 122
joined: 8-10-2009
therealtj
qqq
It's forced for the same reason that children can't watch 18+ material. That people in most countries can't own guns. That you can't drink alcohol under a certain age, and that you can't do drugs.

It's forced for the reason that some where high up are popularly elected officials who think they know what's best for you regardless of ever having met you and fail to appreciate that people are all different. And I think it's wrong.
Are you saying children should watch porn?
No, I'm saying they should be allowed to if they want.

You realize that it has never been scientifically in any way proven it has any bad side effect on children right? More like the reverse, it's just that parents find it ‘frightening’ and then make up some myths about that it damages their fragile souls or whatever to justify their own irrational cultural take on it. There have been countless cultures that had nothing with it, it's just the current west as an offshoot of Abrahamic religions, Japanese, Greek, Indian, Chinese and Aztecan cultures for instance never had such a fuzz about children and sex and acting as if sex doesn't exist if it involves children.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
ozoneocean at 3:54AM, Sept. 1, 2009
(online)
posts: 25,056
joined: 1-2-2004
Well, children and sex sort of has this whole paedophilia thing going for it… That's a little unsavoury. ;)

I don't know about anyone else but I prefer to live in a society that doesn't condone sexualisation of children.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:35PM
qqq at 4:16PM, Sept. 1, 2009
(offline)
posts: 122
joined: 8-10-2009
How does children watching porn has any thing to do with sexualizing children?

If any thing it's children sexualising adults.

And I praefer to live in a society that condones any thing until scientifically provable that it's harming a significant faction actually. One's naïve to think that if supposedly all the other societies from ancient times to praesent day believed some absurd myths that one's own society, id est the modern west does not have them as the sole exception. The thing about myths is that you start to believe them without quaestioning if you're brought up with them and thus as a bias fail to see they are myths.

A lot of things, especially things of sexual nature because it's morally often controversial in the west that people widely believe in are ultimately unproven myths. After all, if just 50 years back people had the widespread believe that homosexuality was contagious and all gay men just raped other men after which they also turned gay? And 25 years back there was the widespread believe, even under medical professionals that homosexuality was completely nature and they believed in a ‘gay gene’ regardless of such a gene not being found until this day and homosexuality now being seen as a combination of nature and nurture, isn't it a taaad conceivable that there are still a lot of strange and stupid myths in society today that people will be aequally ashamed of in 25 years that they believed it?

Especially in the medical sense, like vaccines, a lot of treatments or causes for conditions at various points can remain into professional circles for 75 years with no one ever quaestioning its validity because 75 years back a highly political research indicated it and then people suddenly realize that people have been treated badly for a long time. Human society is ultimately built on myths because humans have a nasty property that they find it extremely hard to shake a believe they've been bombarded with under a certain age. If people were until they got 5 were only exposed to the idea that the earth is flat, they will find it extremely difficult to accept that the earth isn't, regardless of the evidence against it. This applies to about any random fact, there have been cases documented of tribes of people believing they had four fingers, I kid you not, they were unable to be convinced of the fact that they had five fingers on each hand even if it was right in front of them, this is how human reasoning works and there are boundless myths in society which are taken as supreme truth, in this one, where people believe porn has some strange side effects on children, and in some countries were they believe one cures of aids by raping a six year old.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
therealtj at 7:56PM, Sept. 1, 2009
(online)
posts: 3,282
joined: 3-15-2007
qqq
And I praefer to live in a society that condones any thing until scientifically provable that it's harming a significant faction actually.
There's no scientific proof that stealing someone's TV harms them. In fact, watching TV is bad for you, so taking away their TV may be good for them! Does that mean it's right to steal someone's TV?

qqq
One's naïve to think that if supposedly all the other societies from ancient times to praesent day believed some absurd myths that one's own society, id est the modern west does not have them as the sole exception.
Just because an ancient society thought something was morally right doesn't mean it is. People used to think it was good to sacrifice people to their gods, but that doesn't mean it was right to do that.

qqq
A lot of things, especially things of sexual nature because it's morally often controversial in the west that people widely believe in are ultimately unproven myths. After all, if just 50 years back people had the widespread believe that homosexuality was contagious and all gay men just raped other men after which they also turned gay? And 25 years back there was the widespread believe, even under medical professionals that homosexuality was completely nature and they believed in a ‘gay gene’ regardless of such a gene not being found until this day and homosexuality now being seen as a combination of nature and nurture, isn't it a taaad conceivable that there are still a lot of strange and stupid myths in society today that people will be aequally ashamed of in 25 years that they believed it?
Except there have actually been studies that show many sexual predators start off watching pornography on the internet. (Not to say viewing porn garuntees you'll be a sexual predator, but it certainly increases the risk you'll become one.) I'd think children would be just as susceptible to this (if not more) as adults.


Look, I'm not saying children should be shielded from sex, I think their parents should tell them about as soon as they're old enough to understand it. However, there's a difference between explaining something and giving a demonstration.

“The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter Q into a privet bush, but unfortunately there are times when it is unavoidable.”
-Douglas Adams, The Restaurant At the End of the Universe
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:28PM
isukun at 11:48PM, Sept. 1, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
How does children watching porn has any thing to do with sexualizing children?

If any thing it's children sexualising adults.

And somehow that's better? Teaching kids, who have less life experience and common sense than your average adult, that sex with adults is OK?

I would also like to point out it isn't just the Western societies who frown on sex with children. You can look at ancient cultures sometimes and see where they have excused it, but those aren't modern cultures with modern mindsets, responsibilites, knowledge, or customs. Besides, for those cultures the age of maturity was much lower than in most modern cultures, so in their minds they weren't having sex with children. Also, for many of the cultures you've listed, there was a bit of disagreement over the issue and many people did frown on sexual relations with people under what was considered the age of maturity.

There's no scientific proof that stealing someone's TV harms them.

Actually, I think it's a pretty well established fact that stealing anything of value from a person is damaging to that person financially. I'm not positive, but there may also be scientific studies on the emotional effects of theft, as well. Not that I agree with Kyupol, I just think it's a bad analogy.

Except there have actually been studies that show many sexual predators start off watching pornography on the internet.

Actually, that's not really true. There are scientific studies that show that sexual predators often look at porn, but there is no direct correlation between the two. In fact, most psychologists see porn as a good outlet for sexual tension. They also see sexual predators working with different motivations than your average porn junkie. It is actually pretty widely accepted in the scientific community that rape is not something you do because of built up sexual desire.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
qqq at 2:57AM, Sept. 2, 2009
(offline)
posts: 122
joined: 8-10-2009
therealtj
qqq
And I praefer to live in a society that condones any thing until scientifically provable that it's harming a significant faction actually.
There's no scientific proof that stealing someone's TV harms them. In fact, watching TV is bad for you, so taking away their TV may be good for them! Does that mean it's right to steal someone's TV?
Oh, there is, just poll people on their happiness before and after their TV was stolen.

Besides, the catogorial imperative too has its complications.

therealtj
Just because an ancient society thought something was morally right doesn't mean it is. People used to think it was good to sacrifice people to their gods, but that doesn't mean it was right to do that.
I think you failed to read my point correctly, I meant: ‘If they thought those things and were wrong, in fact, if all societies thought so, than surely we too at some points?’

Except there have actually been studies that show many sexual predators start off watching pornography on the internet. (Not to say viewing porn garuntees you'll be a sexual predator, but it certainly increases the risk you'll become one.) I'd think children would be just as susceptible to this (if not more) as adults.
Link me to those studies, as far as I know, the reverse has been statistically analysed for a long time. Availabibility of porn decreases rape

http://www.slate.com/id/2152487/

Or pick one yourself:

http://www.google.com/search?q=availability+of+porn+increases+rape

See, even if you google ‘increase’, you get all sorts of sources showing that it decreases.

Also, you're making a big jump from children watching porn to child porn, not some thing I intended with this comment at all.

Look, I'm not saying children should be shielded from sex, I think their parents should tell them about as soon as they're old enough to understand it. However, there's a difference between explaining something and giving a demonstration.
Define ‘old enough to understand it’? as far as I know, the supposed ‘age of consent’, is even if it exists for individuals about up to 5 years apart for different individuals and has been the sole excuse of the government and parents to not be confronted by the ideas that their kids want to see porn.

They used to think that viewing porn under 18 (arbitrary number) left huge mental scars, now about every fourteen year old kid downloads it with the scars still absent.

isukun
And somehow that's better? Teaching kids, who have less life experience and common sense than your average adult, that sex with adults is OK?
Adults having sex with adults you mean? Yeah, sure, have you ever watched porn?

isukun
I would also like to point out it isn't just the Western societies who frown on sex with children. You can look at ancient cultures sometimes and see where they have excused it, but those aren't modern cultures with modern mindsets, responsibilites, knowledge, or customs. Besides, for those cultures the age of maturity was much lower than in most modern cultures, so in their minds they weren't having sex with children. Also, for many of the cultures you've listed, there was a bit of disagreement over the issue and many people did frown on sexual relations with people under what was considered the age of maturity.
That's a bit of a circular reasoning isn't it? saying ‘Ohh, but it’s valid because we're mature', that's too easy to say of yourself. They would have said the same about themselves, and so would Nazi Germany, in fact, they boldly did so.

Actually, I think it's a pretty well established fact that stealing anything of value from a person is damaging to that person financially. I'm not positive, but there may also be scientific studies on the emotional effects of theft, as well. Not that I agree with Kyupol, I just think it's a bad analogy.
Indeed, nice to see you remain rational here.

Actually, that's not really true. There are scientific studies that show that sexual predators often look at porn, but there is no direct correlation between the two. In fact, most psychologists see porn as a good outlet for sexual tension. They also see sexual predators working with different motivations than your average porn junkie. It is actually pretty widely accepted in the scientific community that rape is not something you do because of built up sexual desire.
And again, quite rational, most people refrain from seeing the flaws in arguments that favour their case though they might exist.


The point is however that assuming that children being exposed to sexuality left them at some point not functioning as adults, that would cause societies that do so to never reach a high level as their adults are disfunctional. Seeing that various of the most ‘advanced’ societies of their days such as the classical Chinese and Greek and Indian societies had no problems with having sex in front of their children, seeing that cavemen had sex in front of their children, it seems an implausible assumption that humans are somehow evolved in a way that being exposed to the concept of sex before a certain age leaves them compromised in their elder lives. If it exists it's caused by how this society treats sex and not an innate nature component of humans. After all, it would be evolutionary quite extremely strange if it left children functionally some how compromised if being told about in what way they reproduce…

But this is more my point too, I noted a variety of issues about the vaccines and forcing people, only one of them was about that children should not be allowed to watch porn. It is singled out, and immediately interpreted as sexualisation of children—pretty far a leap—and even linked to paedophilia on the way. Not some thing I intended from it or could be objectively read into it.

It's a nice illustration how it works with sensitive issues, people are bombarded from child hood with the idea that the combination children + sex is A: bad and B: In some way relates to paedophilia, I fail to see how children being allowed to watch porn has any relation to B but the link is made nonetheless due to moral imprinting. My guess personally is is that it's a lot more dangerous and harmful to children that parents just tell them all sorts of ideas they cannot defend themselves from and just absorb with little resistance and find hard to shake later on, and that is scientifically shown.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
isukun at 5:22AM, Sept. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
Adults having sex with adults you mean? Yeah, sure, have you ever watched porn?

And have you actually watched how kids are influenced by TV and movies? Do you think that six-year-old who punches another neighborhood kid mimicing the Power Rangers cares that the characters in the TV show are older? Porn tends to be based soley in satisfying lustful desires and for the most part is not a very realistic depiction of how people really view sex. It is an exaggeration and can have ill effects if you can't separate it from reality. Many kids find role models in popular media and what does porn teach us? Women ALWAYS want it, condoms are unnecessary, it's normal to have unprotected sex with multiple partners at a time, relationships and marriage are meaningless, sex is only something you do to feel good, and you should always give in to even the slightest desires. Considering how stupid kids already are when it concerns sex, I don't see why we should make them any dumber. A child's mind is still developing and absorbing information from any source it can. Using porn to teach kids about sex is just a bad idea all around.

And 18 is not an arbitrary number. It is when a kid can legally become independent. It is the age when most kids graduate from high school and the legal age at which they can hold a full time job. In a society that is so heavily reliant on a system of trade that emphasizes education, it is important for a parent to be able to provide for their children. There is a reason why a lot of families try to establish a steady source of income before they start having kids. You can't really do that at 14. They may be old enough to understand it, but they aren't old enough to handle the consequences. People don't want to encourage the kind of activities seen in porn until a kid is old enough to handle that kind of responsibility.

saying ‘Ohh, but it’s valid because we're mature', that's too easy to say of yourself.

Age of maturity is not based on a mindset, but on one's ability to provide for themselves. This is why the age of maturity was much lower in the past. People did not need an education to get by in life. You could be pretty successful and never spend time learning math, science, or even how to read. Societies of the past considered people at those younger ages capable of building and providing for a family. How is that circular reasoning? And you are familiar with Godwin's Law, right?

Seeing that various of the most ‘advanced’ societies of their days such as the classical Chinese and Greek and Indian societies had no problems with having sex in front of their children, seeing that cavemen had sex in front of their children, it seems an implausible assumption that humans are somehow evolved in a way that being exposed to the concept of sex before a certain age leaves them compromised in their elder lives.

Classical Chinese women were not permitted to leave their homes and no, they still didn't have sex in front of their children. Greek sexual customs were very private, so I don't know where you got that one, either. I'll admit I'm not as well read up on Indian customs, but I'd be willing to bet they aren't that far off. Most weren't getting down in the streets and children didn't sleep with their parents after a certain age. The caveman argument is probably the most ludicrous. Last I checked, there weren't any cave paintings of people having sex while their kids watched. Any speculation on the sexual customs of cavemen would be just that, speculation. In fact, with many ancient and classical cultures, parents would completely shelter their kids from sex and not teach them anything. With the ancient Greeks, a marriage wasn't finalized until the couple had sex. It wasn't uncommon to have to send them back to the bedroom because they did it wrong.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
qqq at 5:47AM, Sept. 2, 2009
(offline)
posts: 122
joined: 8-10-2009
isukun
Adults having sex with adults you mean? Yeah, sure, have you ever watched porn?

And have you actually watched how kids are influenced by TV and movies? Do you think that six-year-old who punches another neighborhood kid mimicing the Power Rangers cares that the characters in the TV show are older? Porn tends to be based soley in satisfying lustful desires and for the most part is not a very realistic depiction of how people really view sex. It is an exaggeration and can have ill effects if you can't separate it from reality. Many kids find role models in popular media and what does porn teach us? Women ALWAYS want it, condoms are unnecessary, it's normal to have unprotected sex with multiple partners at a time, relationships and marriage are meaningless, sex is only something you do to feel good, and you should always give in to even the slightest desires. Considering how stupid kids already are when it concerns sex, I don't see why we should make them any dumber. A child's mind is still developing and absorbing information from any source it can. Using porn to teach kids about sex is just a bad idea all around.
Fair enough, that's bad, I concede, now take a look in the average disney cartoon, we learn that:

- All women are vain, over chatting shopaholics
- All evil people are ugly, all ugly people are evil
- All punkers are street thugs, all street thugs are punkers
- All people that wear glasses are either really smart, or are socially really uncomfortable and of course in the latter case have those rabbit teeth
- All rich people are evil

I mean, in snow white, in the original Grim Brothers version the step mother was described as beautiful, second only to snow white, but they made her ugly in the film any way.

And this is supposedly a good thing to bombard five year old children with and fun entertainment for the whole family? Ask yourself why ugly kids or kids with glasses are bullied and children with some bulge on their nose are called witches and beaten for it. It's a nice dual standard, at one point the whole moral about Disney cartoons is not to bully, but the children who are bullied in Disney cartoons aren't really the ugly kids that are bullied, and those people are portrayed in those very cartoons as outright evil?

I'd rather have more people grow up to have kinky sex than all this bullying. If you want to ban porn for this reason, be consistent and ban Disney, Pixar and the lot too.

And 18 is not an arbitrary number. It is when a kid can legally become independent. It is the age when most kids graduate from high school and the legal age at which they can hold a full time job. In a society that is so heavily reliant on a system of trade that emphasizes education, it is important for a parent to be able to provide for their children. There is a reason why a lot of families try to establish a steady source of income before they start having kids. You can't really do that at 14. They may be old enough to understand it, but they aren't old enough to handle the consequences. People don't want to encourage the kind of activities seen in porn until a kid is old enough to handle that kind of responsibility.
So you're saying 18 is not arbitrary because it's put to other arbitrary numbers as well?

Show me a research that indicates that 18 is biologically some kind of magical number at which point people become able to make those decisions on their own. In reality it's a gradual process to maturity and independence and most of all it is different for different individuals.

Legally we have this:
Drinking: 21/US, 16/NL 18/Japan
Driving: 16/US, 18/NL, 15/NZ
Age of consent 16-18/US, 14/NL, 13/Japan, 12/Mexico

Those numbers are all completely arbitrary and just chosen at whim with no solid investigation to it, quite evident by that they are all different compared to the moral of the society. The Netherlands is more of a bike or foot society and it's frowned upon here if people overuse cars so driving is older here, a lot of people consciously don't have a car here. On the other hand the Netherlands is sexually more liberal as well as with drugs and drinks so that's a lot lower here. It's not based on science or medicine those lines, it's based on moral and culture.

Age of maturity is not based on a mindset, but on one's ability to provide for themselves. This is why the age of maturity was much lower in the past. People did not need an education to get by in life. You could be pretty successful and never spend time learning math, science, or even how to read. Societies of the past considered people at those younger ages capable of building and providing for a family. How is that circular reasoning? And you are familiar with Godwin's Law, right?
I meant, that you said that of your own culture. That your own culture was more mature and developed than for instance the Ancient Greek one.

Classical Chinese women were not permitted to leave their homes and no, they still didn't have sex in front of their children. Greek sexual customs were very private, so I don't know where you got that one, either. I'll admit I'm not as well read up on Indian customs, but I'd be willing to bet they aren't that far off. Most weren't getting down in the streets and children didn't sleep with their parents after a certain age. The caveman argument is probably the most ludicrous. Last I checked, there weren't any cave paintings of people having sex while their kids watched. Any speculation on the sexual customs of cavemen would be just that, speculation. In fact, with many ancient and classical cultures, parents would completely shelter their kids from sex and not teach them anything. With the ancient Greeks, a marriage wasn't finalized until the couple had sex. It wasn't uncommon to have to send them back to the bedroom because they did it wrong.
Not so much:

http://www.google.com/search?q=spartan+pederasty

http://www.google.com/search?q=homosexuality+in+china

And you know about the rooster thing didn't you? And that in Greek when a young boy went to train under a master in some craft or academic discipline, part of the deal was that the master could take him up the arse in various aeons of Greek civilizaiton:

http://www.bigeye.com/sexeducation/ancientchina.html

This shows also quite clearly that it changes over time.

Some cultures condone exposing children to it, others don't, and there is no correlation between which survives, showing that children can theoretically handle it. After all, as I said, it would be a pretty absurd evolutionary disadvantage for humans if their children became compromised if they were exposed to the idea of sex, either visually or orally. As all other great apes except humans seem to breed in front of their children the whole time, especially the chimps, the most related species, it would seem to be some thing humans evolved between now and 3 million years back, and I quite frankly can't see how on earth a species could evolve such an enormous disadvantage.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
isukun at 7:30AM, Sept. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
Fair enough, that's bad, I concede, now take a look in the average disney cartoon, we learn that:

- All women are vain, over chatting shopaholics
- All evil people are ugly, all ugly people are evil
- All punkers are street thugs, all street thugs are punkers
- All people that wear glasses are either really smart, or are socially really uncomfortable and of course in the latter case have those rabbit teeth
- All rich people are evil

I really have to wonder hat Disney cartoons you're watching since I can think of multiple cases which contradict every one of those points.

I'd rather have more people grow up to have kinky sex than all this bullying.

It's not the growing up to have kinky sex that's the problem. After all, kids don't wait until they're grown up to start bullying people, now, do they?

So you're saying 18 is not arbitrary because it's put to other arbitrary numbers as well?

And how are they arbitrary numbers? Is finishing school at 18 an arbitrary number? Is it arbitrary to want kids to have an education before they enter the work force? Is it arbitrary to set the adult age at a point where most children will have fully developed in all physical aspects and not just sexually?

Age of consent 16-18/US, 14/NL, 13/Japan, 12/Mexico

This is also very misleading. Age of consent laws vary from region to region, and often national laws and region laws do not reflect the same standards. While the state may set the age of consent between 16 and 18, national law prevents illicit sexual contact between an adult and anyone classified as a minor (i.e. anyone under the age of 18). The ony way around this is marriage, and even then, only in certain states.

The 14/NL is just false as their age of consent is 16.

Japan's national law is 13, but their regional laws are generally 17, and even in areas where it may be lower, the types of contact are limited by age range and social situation. The age is a little lower than in the US since until recently it was not uncommon for women to choose between a career and marriage and many women would drop out of school to marry an older man rather than pursue continuing education. Recent changes have led to most regions upping their age of consent.

Many regions in Mexico also heighten the age of consent and there are youth protection laws in place on the national level where in any case where an adult has sexual relations with a person under the age of 18, either the person or their family can report it and the adult can be prosecuted. The crime is considered within the same class as homicide, so it is at least something the government takes very seriously. The level of education we take for granted here in the US, though, is not really necessary in all regions of Mexico, which kind of goes back to the whole age of maturity thing.

I meant, that you said that of your own culture. That your own culture was more mature and developed than for instance the Ancient Greek one.

Nope, didn't say that. Read it again.

You can look at ancient cultures sometimes and see where they have excused it, but those aren't modern cultures with modern mindsets, responsibilites, knowledge, or customs.

Not so much:

Actually, quite so much. Despite common misconceptions due to the termiology used in ancient literature, most pederastic relationships in ancient Greece were chaste. Sexual contact was not a requirement, and generally these relationships were far more common among those of the upper class than those of the lower class. Also, pederasty was used by some of the more warlike tribes (such as Sparta) because it was believed to create a greater bond among the troops and bolster greater morale and dedication to working as a group. Many of the other city-states actually looked down on this sort of practice.

This shows also quite clearly that it changes over time.

Yet, it doesn't contradict what I said. So their religious views on sex changed, they still weren't doing it in front of the kids. And while the terminoloy for some roles changed, the practices remained largely the same throughout the dynasties. Homosexuality was never truly embraced as a norm by the general populace, even though there was a period where it was more common.

After all, as I said, it would be a pretty absurd evolutionary disadvantage for humans if their children became compromised if they were exposed to the idea of sex, either visually or orally

The issue isn't that they would be exposed to the idea of sex. I'm all for parents informing their childen of sex in a responsible way. Watching porn is not at all the same thing, though. Porn is not an instructional video on proper family planning or social ettiquette.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM
qqq at 8:22AM, Sept. 2, 2009
(offline)
posts: 122
joined: 8-10-2009
isukun
Fair enough, that's bad, I concede, now take a look in the average disney cartoon, we learn that:

- All women are vain, over chatting shopaholics
- All evil people are ugly, all ugly people are evil
- All punkers are street thugs, all street thugs are punkers
- All people that wear glasses are either really smart, or are socially really uncomfortable and of course in the latter case have those rabbit teeth
- All rich people are evil

I really have to wonder hat Disney cartoons you're watching since I can think of multiple cases which contradict every one of those points.
Donald Duck? Ever read it, same with Mickey, they thrive on such stereotypes, in fact, all children cartoons thrive on such stereotypes, let's take a look at the bad guys from some classics:

Ugly angry looking fat guy that's evil and has BLACK HAIR

Selfless hero with a chin you can slice cheese on, and BLONDE

Left, original evil smurfette as created by Gargamel, uncombed ugly hair and and all, BUT THEN SHE TURNS GOOD AND GETS FLAXEN LOCKS OF WOVEN GOLD AND HUGE EYELASHES

Guess which one is evil?

Oh, and did I mention that these are the only regulars in duckberg that are not clean shaven?

Do I need to grab a picture of Magica DeSpell being the only regular character with black hair? She's the about the only character with hare, they gave her hair so they could make it black, no other female ducks have hair, she wears black clothes too instead of the usual pink.

Not to mention that in children's media, the Damesell in distress is always a blonde beautiful youthful woman, and the one that kidnapped it is usually an ugly and fat creature of whatever monstrosity.

Media directed to children thrives on stereotypes, it created them, it needs them now to be understandable to children and it perpetuates them further. What better way to easily define a socially uncomfortable, insecure and goofy person by giving that person glasses? What better way to give the hero the sympathy of the audience by making him gorgeous, blonde, radiate holy light from about every orifice and make the bad guy ugly, fat, a face ridden with imperfections, black hair and of course a pointy moustache.

It's not the growing up to have kinky sex that's the problem. After all, kids don't wait until they're grown up to start bullying people, now, do they?
I said kinky sex then again, not bullying.

And how are they arbitrary numbers? Is finishing school at 18 an arbitrary number? Is it arbitrary to want kids to have an education before they enter the work force? Is it arbitrary to set the adult age at a point where most children will have fully developed in all physical aspects and not just sexually?
Jap, people finish schools at different ages and people do not become fully developed at 18 magically. It's different for different people. People do not suddenly get adult once they are eighteen or near it. That's a myth, it's a legal number guessed at whim without serious research behind it, not a biological number. Did you really think that human biology depended on such a unit as a ‘year’ as countless civilizations have ‘years’ that do not synchronize at all with the earth's around the sun?

It's all cultural, I needn't remind you I hope that Bar Mitzvah ceremonies held at 13 years old are to signal the coming of age of boys in traditional Jewish culture, and Bat Mitzvah for girls is even at twelve. The number ‘eighteen’ is arbitrary, one doesn't biologically become mature at 18, school systems are just designed to coincide with them In the USA, in the Netherlands depending on the school system it can go from 16 to 18 until you get your secondary school diploma. In Flanders it's 18-19 I believe. 18 is a number concocted at whim decades back that has no real biological meaning.

This is also very misleading. Age of consent laws vary from region to region, and often national laws and region laws do not reflect the same standards. While the state may set the age of consent between 16 and 18, national law prevents illicit sexual contact between an adult and anyone classified as a minor (i.e. anyone under the age of 18). The ony way around this is marriage, and even then, only in certain states.
And that'smy point, if it differs that much around regions it cannot be a hard scientific fact.

The 14/NL is just false as their age of consent is 16.
Nope, sorry, I live there, Dutch laws are complex in this respect, the age of consent is 14 years old, but until 16 an older party can still be held responsible for statuary rape if and only if the younger party presses charges. After 16 they say you were old enough to resist and say you didn't want to. And under fourteen in all cases, de jure, both the older and younger party did some thing they weren't allowed to.

Japan's national law is 13, but their regional laws are generally 17, and even in areas where it may be lower, the types of contact are limited by age range and social situation. The age is a little lower than in the US since until recently it was not uncommon for women to choose between a career and marriage and many women would drop out of school to marry an older man rather than pursue continuing education. Recent changes have led to most regions upping their age of consent.
Yap, out of political pressure from the US, same reason they officially banned some form of lolicon there but no one enforces it, this is the same. Japan's quite flexible about these laws and though it stands like it on paper, 11 years old is not uncommon and not treated with vast disrespect or as a social stigma.

Many regions in Mexico also heighten the age of consent and there are youth protection laws in place on the national level where in any case where an adult has sexual relations with a person under the age of 18, either the person or their family can report it and the adult can be prosecuted. The crime is considered within the same class as homicide, so it is at least something the government takes very seriously. The level of education we take for granted here in the US, though, is not really necessary in all regions of Mexico, which kind of goes back to the whole age of maturity thing.
Yes, and if it's that different in different regions, how can you still think it's a scientifically based thing, it's a moral thing, not a scientific one, society doesn't hold it as ‘appropriate’ if children under a certain age are sexually independent.

Nope, didn't say that. Read it again.

You can look at ancient cultures sometimes and see where they have excused it, but those aren't modern cultures with modern mindsets, responsibilites, knowledge, or customs.
If you didn't intend that, I fail to see the point at all then. You point a difference, but show it's relevance, which can be positive or negative.

Actually, quite so much. Despite common misconceptions due to the termiology used in ancient literature, most pederastic relationships in ancient Greece were chaste. Sexual contact was not a requirement, and generally these relationships were far more common among those of the upper class than those of the lower class. Also, pederasty was used by some of the more warlike tribes (such as Sparta) because it was believed to create a greater bond among the troops and bolster greater morale and dedication to working as a group. Many of the other city-states actually looked down on this sort of practice.
It wasn't uniform throughout Greek as it wasn't throughout the whole Chinese history no, the point of the matter is that if it supposedly was scarring for children, or compromised them in some extend as adults, those societies couldn't have thrived as their adults had a dysfunction, they thrived thus making implausible the idea that being open about sex to children is supposedly scarring them or compromising them in some way.

Yet, it doesn't contradict what I said. So their religious views on sex changed, they still weren't doing it in front of the kids. And while the terminoloy for some roles changed, the practices remained largely the same throughout the dynasties. Homosexuality was never truly embraced as a norm by the general populace, even though there was a period where it was more common.
They did and still do, many people in the US would find the sexual transparency children in Japan or the Netherlands enjoy to be damaging to them, but no child gets damaged from it here

Accordingly this (Dutch) source that should be intelligible almost 15% of Dutch people at the age of fourteen have lost their virginity, which I find believable from my environment.

http://www.compleetsexy.nl/Sex-Woordenboek/O/Ontmaagding.html

http://www.google.com/search?q=age+first+watch+porn

And that last google seems to suggest that a lot of people watch porn from 12 on at the least. If your hypothesis is correct and these laws that forbid people to watch porn before 18 (but strangely have sex at 16…?) are making any sense and are a true measure to protect children form some thing? Shouldn't the people that were teens since the rise of the internet, that is 18-30 years now all have some significant mental dysfunction at some point as they watched porn all of the sudden?

The issue isn't that they would be exposed to the idea of sex. I'm all for parents informing their childen of sex in a responsible way. Watching porn is not at all the same thing, though. Porn is not an instructional video on proper family planning or social ettiquette.
True, but it doesn't seem to be that harmful either, supposedly you have to walk away from porn sites if you're under 18, I didn't do that when I was, none of my friends did that, in fact, I think few kids that encountered they such a banner. None of them are scarred, and strange insanities that are sex related haven't suddenly trippled or even significantly increased since internet became available to those people and they started to watch porn.

So I find the common hypothesis that watching porn leaves any bad scars or some thing similar on children pretty much falsified as assuming that it's true, a lot of children should be scarred by now.

I personally think it's the old human story that people simply don't like some thing or become scarred of it and then unconsciously try to find an excuse to ban it, it cause holy wars, it caused incarnation of homosexuals.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
Hawk at 9:24AM, Sept. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,760
joined: 1-2-2006
I'm a bit torn on this because the thread has gone WAY off topic… but has become far more interesting than the initial thing we were talking about. However, I must suggest that the discussion continue in separate threads (either a new “Children and Pornography” thread, or “Disney Distorts Children”).

And by the way, qqq, this evil woman has an identical twin who is very good and kindhearted. Also, learn about the principles of character design. It's not about furthering an agenda, it's about using people's preconceptions to make a cohesive character that resonates with its audience. And there really are exceptions to everything you listed.

Sorry, I'm getting carried away. We need to either get back on topic or start new threads.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:46PM
qqq at 9:40AM, Sept. 2, 2009
(offline)
posts: 122
joined: 8-10-2009
Hawk
I'm a bit torn on this because the thread has gone WAY off topic… but has become far more interesting than the initial thing we were talking about. However, I must suggest that the discussion continue in separate threads (either a new “Children and Pornography” thread, or “Disney Distorts Children”).

And by the way, qqq, this evil woman has an identical twin who is very good and kindhearted. Also, learn about the principles of character design. It's not about furthering an agenda, it's about using people's preconceptions to make a cohesive character that resonates with its audience. And there really are exceptions to everything you listed.

Sorry, I'm getting carried away. We need to either get back on topic or start new threads.
Of course it's not about furthering an agenda, I don't think Disney's all out evil, same can be sad about porn publishers, they don't mean evil by featuring unnatural sex, they mean to sell, just as Disney needs those stereotypes to sell.

I'm just pointing out that those stereotypes are thrown at kids.

And Gaston isn't ‘beautiful’, Gaston is narcissist, yeah, he has the muscles and the chin but it's not drawn in a way that it makes him look beautiful to people, it's drawn in a way that makes him look shallow. Again, the stereotype of the Rich guy being Shallow, and then of course even The Beast turns into a beautiful prince. And even though he's still drawn as a beast, it's a beast that has a kind and warm anthropomorphized face, though he has the horns and all, he still registers to most human perceivers as ‘beautiful’. Else the audience can't get his sympathy.

But yeah, split the thread.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:57PM
isukun at 1:57PM, Sept. 2, 2009
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
I'm not going to continue the argument here, and only say that it is quite incredible how you seem to get what you want to hear out of what I say rather than what I'm actually saying. Maybe it's a language barrier issue? You also need to re-watch Ducktales.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:04PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved