Sex Before Marriage

[_Xenophon]

Just for the record, I think you guys are reading DT wrong in terms of "creepiness" factor. I'll explain later if I need to.

Frankly, I don't find him creepy per se, I was just using honor's term. It is quite apparent that he has a very distorted perspective on intimate relationships though, and I think that shows in nearly ever post he makes. I think his attempts to make this "more emotional" do more harm for him than good. Literally everyone on this board has agreed with him that prison is probably not the correct response in this case. Where we disagree is how he presents and frames these cases.

P.S. as I was writing this I think Honor pretty well laid out my thoughts, so thanks for that.

[_DoubtingThomas]

Frankly, I don't find him creepy per se, I was just using honor's term. It is quite apparent that he has a very distorted perspective on intimate relationships though, and I think that shows in nearly ever post he makes. I think his attempts to make this "more emotional" do more harm for him than good. Literally everyone on this board has agreed with him that prison is probably not the correct response in this case. Where we disagree is how he presents and frames these cases.

P.S. as I was writing this I think Honor pretty well laid out my thoughts, so thanks for that.

Okay please help me understand what exactly makes me have a "distorted perspective on intimate relationships"? Can you please give me the exact quotes and explain. Please.

Perhaps you are right, as an open minded man I won't deny what you are telling me is possible, but I need the quotes, an explanation, and evidence.

[_DoubtingThomas]

DoubtingThomas just seems like a regressed or sheltered Mormon male. I always thought a lot of Mormon males were behind the social power curve by 5 or 10 years.

DoubtingThomas, you're fine. Don't let the hatahs bate wit da hate.

- Doc

Haha thanks

[Guest]

Here's your second post in this thread.

Emphasis mine, of course. What does the relative attractiveness of the offender have to do with anything? If she was a hideous woman, would you be more bothered by it?

First I want to apologize I been posting too many sex related topics, this one has to be my last one. It just really bothers me because I used to think sex before marriage was an abomination.

Sex occupies much of your posting here, as you note, and you note that it's driven because it bothers you that you were taught sex outside of marriage was not just wrong, but an abomination.

This was in response to why you were posting about the attractiveness of a female teacher.

Do you think that demonstrates a healthy relationship to the subject of sex?

What does the related attractiveness of the offender? I understand for the law 20 year old girls having consensual sex with 16-17 year old students are offenders, but not for me. For me offenders are rapists. Yes attractiveness is irrelevant for actual offenders.

This second sentence tells us the following:

1) You did not view young teachers who have sex with students just under the legal age of consent as "offenders"...a term associated with doing something that earns a person a spot on the registered sex offender's list.

2) You offered a qualifying explanation for including attractiveness to the discussion regarding young teachers who have sex with underage students as attractiveness not needing to apply to people who actually are offenders, or in this case "rapists" and you care to define them. The implication being that attractive female teachers who have sex with under-aged male students aren't offenders and their attractiveness is pertinent to understanding why. The further implication being that their attractiveness is causal to their being in the situation. Teen boys are going to want to have sex with attractive young women, whether they are teachers or not, because of biology. You make this point later in the thread, here:

However, it is the male students that make the first move, not the teachers. Psychology Today article says, "vast majority of adult-child sexual liaisons are consensual. In some, the under-age girls are the initiators and pursuers. And sometimes the men wind up in prison". I think it is highly likely that male students are the initiators. Young men only care about sex, and it makes sense in evolutionary biology.

And you then close your first post by reading EA as approving rather than just rightly reading your intentions in the other post:

Yes, but as EAllusion explains, "I think DoubtingThomas highlights these points in an effort to point out that the high schoolers they had relationships with probably wanted it,"

So, let me ask you this, DT: What do YOU think this says about your understanding of the role of sex in a relationship?

[_DoubtingThomas]

Literally everyone on this board has agreed with him that prison is probably not the correct response in this case. Where we disagree is how he presents and frames these cases.

Forgive me for saying the 20 year old teachers are attractive

[_Jersey Girl]

Just for the record, I think you guys are reading DT wrong in terms of "creepiness" factor. I'll explain later if I need to.

Frankly, I don't find him creepy per se, I was just using honor's term. It is quite apparent that he has a very distorted perspective on intimate relationships though, and I think that shows in nearly ever post he makes. I think his attempts to make this "more emotional" do more harm for him than good. Literally everyone on this board has agreed with him that prison is probably not the correct response in this case. Where we disagree is how he presents and frames these cases.

P.S. as I was writing this I think Honor pretty well laid out my thoughts, so thanks for that.

Okay let's go with your above, Xeno. Why do you suppose he has a distorted perspective about intimate relationships?

Just toss out a thought or two on that, okay?

[_honorentheos]

Okay let's go with your above, Xeno. Why do you suppose he has a distorted perspective about intimate relationships?

Just toss out a thought or two on that, okay?

Are you asking that Xenophon speculate as to why DT has a distorted perspective about intimate relationships?

[_DoubtingThomas]

First I want to apologize I been posting too many sex related topics, this one has to be my last one. It just really bothers me because I used to think sex before marriage was an abomination
Sex occupies much of your posting here, as you note, and you note that it's driven because it bothers you that you were taught sex outside of marriage was not just wrong, but an abomination.

This was in response to why you were posting about the attractiveness of a female teacher.

Do you think that demonstrates a healthy relationship to the subject of sex?

I did apologize because sex is a topic that makes many uncomfortable, and MD isn't a sex discussion board.

The implication being that attractive female teachers who have sex with under-aged male students aren't offenders and their attractiveness is pertinent to understanding why. The further implication being that their attractiveness is causal to their being in the situation. Teen boys are going to want to have sex with attractive young women, whether they are teachers or not, because of biology.

I don't see 20 year old female teachers (attractive or not) as offenders for consensual sex. I understand judges feel differently, but it is just my opinion. Now, if an attractive 20 year old girl (teacher) threatens or manipulates a guy, then she would need at least some time in prison, but I have a gut feeling that rarely happens. Xenophon wrote, "Literally everyone on this board has agreed with him that prison is probably not the correct response in this case"

Sex occupies much of your posting here, as you note, and you note that it's driven because it bothers you that you were taught sex outside of marriage was not just wrong, but an abomination.

This was in response to why you were posting about the attractiveness of a female teacher.

Do you think that demonstrates a healthy relationship to the subject of sex?

You make this point later in the thread, here:

However, it is the male students that make the first move, not the teachers. Psychology Today article says, "vast majority of adult-child sexual liaisons are consensual. In some, the under-age girls are the initiators and pursuers. And sometimes the men wind up in prison". I think it is highly likely that male students are the initiators. Young men only care about sex, and it makes sense in evolutionary biology.

And you then close your first post by reading EAllusion as approving rather than just rightly reading your intentions in the other post:

Yes, but as EAllusion explains, "I think DoubtingThomas highlights these points in an effort to point out that the high schoolers they had relationships with probably wanted it,"

So, let me ask you this, DoubtingThomas: What do YOU think this says about your understanding of the role of sex in a relationship?

I am not sure. Is sex only suppose to be for long-term loving relationships? Is casual sex unhealthy? Does a healthy sex require long-term monogamy? Please give me the references, I am all open minded

[_Jersey Girl]

Okay let's go with your above, Xeno. Why do you suppose he has a distorted perspective about intimate relationships?

Just toss out a thought or two on that, okay?

Are you asking that Xenophon speculate as to why DT has a distorted perspective about intimate relationships?

That's exactly what I'm asking him to do. You're free to answer the same question if you'd like.

[_Xenophon]

Okay let's go with your above, Xeno. Why do you suppose he has a distorted perspective about intimate relationships?

Just toss out a thought or two on that, okay?

Are you asking that Xenophon speculate as to why DT has a distorted perspective about intimate relationships?

If this is the question, I can't even begin to speculate what causes it. It probably wouldn't be too out there to suggest that his parents probably did not rear him to understand, embrace or think about sexuality in a positive light given his LDS upbringing. That would be pure speculation on my part and I'm pretty uncomfortable suggesting that is the issue. I would direct this question to him, unless you don't agree with it of course.

However if you meant that as, "what about his posting points to a distorted perspective". I think Honor laid out several great examples. I think in any of the threads where he worries about things like the girl revoking consent post intimacy are also great examples particularly where alcohol is involved.

Or you could just go with the post right above mine:

I did apologize because sex is a topic that makes many uncomfortable, and MD isn't a sex discussion board

Not a single person on this board has expressed a single misgiving about discussing topics of a sexual nature, besides DT. No mod has asked him to stop, as far as I am aware nor any poster. But when we ask him to clarify his positions and direct pointed questions at him, he becomes pretty defensive. He is demonstrated no capacity for understanding why power dynamics within a relationship can distort consent and why a teacher/student relationship should be inappropriate. That does not speak to a healthy understanding of real world consent.

As an aside, DT. Please read absolutely no malice in my posts towards you. I am really just trying to get a better understanding of where you are coming from and offering a bit of what I might think help your posts resound with the general population a bit better.