Childlike Sex Dolls

[Cardinal]

I'd feel better about if they were getting their rocks off with said doll while also enrolled in an intensive therapeutic program. I'm not comfortable with them doing it unsupervised. A doll with sensors and a microprocessor providing a therapist some feedback would be ideal.

As I mentioned in a post above, we need to know if the attraction is of a nurturing, but albeit, inappropriate desire to be with kids, or if it is driven by a need to hurt, dominate and control them. A feedback type doll would provide a therapist with that information.

We already know it's a predatory relationship. Captain Courtesy argued that point more times than I can count.

Yes, therapy should be in the mix.

 

[William Rea]

This came up roughly a year ago, and my reaction to this now is that same as it was then.

1. Ew.
2. If the potential sex offender is getting his rocks off on a doll rather than a real child, that's a win.

At least you came up with a 2. Some won't get past Ew. Ever.

 

[William Rea]

Are all Brits really unable to discern between a 16 year old boy getting lucky by nailing his rather hot 23 year old female teacher and a 5 year old child being raped--or is that just you?

That your dogmatic prejudices won't allow you to discern the hypocrisy says more about you then me but hey, like I said, I have no preconceptions, the Engineer/Scientist/Empiricist in me prefers solutions to problems that work regardless of whether I morally approve or do not approve of the choices that people make. You have already shown at least tacit approval on this forum for statutory rape and yet here you are in this thread 'showboating' with the same subject. It is embarrassing and certainly belies your claim to being 'centrist'.

 

[Henrin]

That your dogmatic prejudices won't allow you to discern the hypocrisy says more about you then me but hey, like I said, I have no preconceptions, the Engineer/Scientist/Empiricist in me prefers solutions to problems that work regardless of whether I morally approve or do not approve of the choices that people make. You have already shown at least tacit approval on this forum for statutory rape and yet here you are in this thread 'showboating' with the same subject. It is embarrassing and certainly belies your claim to being 'centrist'.

Didn't he approve of a sixteen year old boy consenting to sex with a twenty-three year old(I think that was the age) teacher? Why do you compare consented behavior of a sixteen year old boy to say a boy that is six years old being forced into sex with an adult? For that matter, are you aware that people that are attracted to sixteen year old's are not the group of people we are talking about?

 

[William Rea]

Didn't he approve of a sixteen year old boy consenting to sex with a twenty-three year old(I think that was the age) teacher? Why do you compare consented behavior of a sixteen year old boy to say a boy that is six years old being forced into sex with an adult?

The teacher was hot and boys will be boys huh? The underlying problem here is how some people have no basic principles, their morality is skewed by their personal ew factor. The age of consent in Texas is 17 by the way.

 

[Henrin]

The teacher was hot and boys will be boys huh? The underlying problem here is how some people have no basic principles, their morality is skewed by their personal ew factor. The age of consent in Texas is 17 by the way.

Age of consent laws are of no meaning to me, you know. By all accounts the boy in the story consented and by all accounts someone attracted to people that are sixteen or even seventeen years old are NOT the same group of people attracted to say a six year old. You're bringing up an entirely different attraction and group of people into the discussion to make a point with the use of a case of consensual sex. Your argument simply doesn't work to reach your desired effect.

 

[calamity]

That your dogmatic prejudices won't allow you to discern the hypocrisy says more about you then me but hey, like I said, I have no preconceptions, the Engineer/Scientist/Empiricist in me prefers solutions to problems that work regardless of whether I morally approve or do not approve of the choices that people make. You have already shown at least tacit approval on this forum for statutory rape and yet here you are in this thread 'showboating' with the same subject. It is embarrassing and certainly belies your claim to being 'centrist'.

I do not consider a 16 year old boy banging his 23 year old teacher rape. Neither do most men. But, we certainly consider buggering a child rape, and most of us consider child-like sex dolls to be sick.

 

[calamity]

Age of consent laws are of no meaning to me, you know. By all accounts the boy in the story consented and by all accounts someone attracted to people that are sixteen or even seventeen years old are NOT the same group of people attracted to say a six year old. You're bringing up an entirely different attraction and group of people into the discussion to make a point with the use of a case of consensual sex. Your argument simply doesn't work to reach your desired effect.

For some reason, William is trying to equate a nearly adult male banging his female teacher with a 5-year old being molested by some pervert. Not sure why he is doing it. Not sure I care.

 

[William Rea]

Age of consent laws are of no meaning to me, you know. By all accounts the boy in the story consented and by all accounts someone attracted to people that sixteen or even seventeen years old is NOT the same group of people attracted to say a six year old. You're bringing up an entirely different attraction and group of people into the discussion to make a point with use of a case of consensual sex.

Nope, the 16 year old is not legally capable of giving consent, doesn't matter what you think and by the way, if you do not recognise age of consent laws then how are you going to show that a six year old was not capable of consenting?

 

[William Rea]

For some reason, William is trying to equate a nearly adult male banging his female teacher with a 5-year old being molested by some pervert. Not sure why he is doing it. Not sure I care.

No. I am merely pointing out your hypocrisy, which I have, and to which you have no answer.

 

[William Rea]

I do not consider a 16 year old boy banging his 23 year old teacher rape. Neither do most men. But, we certainly consider buggering a child rape, and most of us consider child-like sex dolls to be sick.

I am sure it will earn you your place in heaven.

 

[Henrin]

Nope, the 16 year old is not legally capable of giving consent, doesn't matter what you think and by the way, if you do not recognise age of consent laws then how are you going to show that a six year old was not capable of consenting?

Legally capable of consent is a really dumb thing to consider the important variable here. The boy factually DID consent to the sex. If the law recognizes his consent or not is hardly something I care two ****s about.

 

[Henrin]

No. I am merely pointing out your hypocrisy, which I have, and to which you have no answer.

There is no hypocrisy in his position. A sixteen year old boy is not likely to object to having sex with his hot twenty-three old year old teacher. In fact, there is a good chance that the sixteen year old boy not only is open to the idea, but was the party pursuing it.

 

[calamity]

No. I am merely pointing out your hypocrisy, which I have, and to which you have no answer.

No. It's more like you failed to show how supporting the idea that a 16 year old (someone who is old enough to go to jail and drive a car) having the right to bang his 23 year old teacher is in any way related to a grown man sexually abusing a child under age-12.

 

[calamity]

I am sure it will earn you your place in heaven.

What?

 

[calamity]

Legally capable of consent is a really dumb thing to consider the important variable here. The boy factually DID consent to the sex. If the law recognizes his consent or not is hardly something I care two ****s about.

Especially when we know there was no coercion on the part of the teacher, but rather it was an offer made by the student. Damn straight he consented, and he also initiated it.

 

[Henrin]

Especially when we know there was no coercion on the part of the teacher, but rather it was an offer made by the student. Damn straight he consented, and he also initiated it.

In many of these cases involving right out of college teachers and sixteen/seventeen year old boys the boy is the one that initiated it. It's usually not just a one day thing either, but something the boy actively pursued for a while before she went along with it.

 

[calamity]

In many of these cases involving right out of college teachers and sixteen/seventeen year old boys the boy is the one that initiated it. It's usually not just a one day thing either, but something the boy actively pursued for a while before she went along with it.

The hypocrisy is on William, not that he'll admit it. In one breath he supports the right of a perv to do as he will with a child-like sex doll; in another, he denies a grown young man the right to consent to sex with a woman who is only a 1/2 dozen years older than him.

Liberals do stuff like that all the time. "It's OK for a 16 year old to declare himself a female and start taking hormones, but it's wrong for that same 16 year old to bang hottie teacher."

 

[Henrin]

The hypocrisy is on William, not that he'll admit it. In one breath he supports the right of a perv to do as he will with a child-like sex doll; in another, he denies a grown young man the right to consent to sex with a woman who is only a 1/2 dozen years older than him.

These dolls are disturbing as all hell, but I don't really think there is any harm from them. Not that I think they are effective at all of course or something that I approve of.

Liberals do stuff like that all the time. "It's OK for a 16 year old to declare himself a female and start taking hormones, but it's wrong for that same 16 year old to bang hottie teacher."

Seriously, WTF is that even about? He can consent to shorting his lifespan by going through another puberty(it has been shown that puberty shortens someones lifespan), but consenting to sex is somehow off limits. What the **** ever.

 

[calamity]

These dolls are disturbing as all hell, but I don't really think there is any harm from them. Not that I think they are effective at all of course or something that I approve of.



Seriously, WTF is that even about? He can consent to shorting his lifespan by going through another puberty(it has been shown that puberty shortens someones lifespan), but consenting to sex is somehow off limits. What the **** ever.

They also approve of 16 year old girls (and younger) getting abortions without parental consent. Just thought I would throw that out there.

 

[Henrin]

They also approve of 16 year old girls (and younger) getting abortions without parental consent. Just thought I would throw that out there.

And consider that FTM's can potentially take large amount of testosterone until their natural death in their eighties. Men's testosterone levels decrease as they get older so a guy like Lebron that probably had comparable levels to what they are taking at say twenty isn't going to keep those levels his whole life, while someone like July that is now Jack is going to keep those levels for decades on end. Testosterone shortens the lifespan of cells more than any other hormone, and FTM's are taking near top of the chart levels the rest of their life. That is so freaking foolish and irresponsible for doctors to do it's staggering. This same girl at sixteen though consenting to sex is OMFG situation and obviously rape. So basically we can take potentially decades of the kids life off, but that hot teacher that they totally want to have sex with is a no no. :lamo

But yeah, they can't consent to sex, but the result of sex, oh yeah, they can consent to eliminating that. It seems like many people don't even try to tie their positions together.

 

[calamity]

And consider that FTM's can potentially take large amount of testosterone until their natural death in their eighties. Men's testosterone levels decrease as they get older so a guy like Lebron that probably had comparable levels to what they are taking at say twenty isn't going to keep those levels his whole life, while someone like July that is now Jack is going to keep those levels for decades on end. Testosterone shortens the lifespan of cells more than any other hormone, and FTM's are taking near top of the chart levels the rest of their life. That is so freaking foolish and irresponsible for doctors to do it's staggering. This same girl at sixteen though consenting to sex is OMFG situation and obviously rape. So basically we can take potentially decades of the kids life off, but that hot teacher that they totally want to have sex with is a no no. :lamo

But yeah, they can't consent to sex, but the result of sex, oh yeah, they can consent to eliminating that. It seems like many people don't even try to tie their positions together.

Yep, old enough to consent to abortions and dangerous hormones, but too young to voluntarily **** teacher. Total lack of congruence.

 

[Hawkeye10]

They also approve of 16 year old girls (and younger) getting abortions without parental consent. Just thought I would throw that out there.

We live in a world where minors can consent to abortions and sex changes but are not allowed to consent to sex... which is bazaar.

I think what bothers me most in the understanding that minors will be sexual, but the state retains the ability to go get anyone to include other minors who has sex with a minor if they want to, for whatever reason.

This is not justice.

 

[Henrin]

Yep, old enough to consent to abortions and dangerous hormones, but too young to voluntarily **** teacher. Total lack of congruence.

Hell, it's been connected to changing sexual attractions in some too. I guess you can make that kid straight/gay/bisexual through treatment, but dammit, they better not act on it!

 

[Deuce]

Yep, old enough to consent to abortions and dangerous hormones, but too young to voluntarily **** teacher. Total lack of congruence.

So, you're saying it should be legal for teachers to **** students?