Who dresses their little girls like this?

[The Shake]

Sorry Shake... There is a difference between saying that some men are aroused/attracted by younger girls or girls who are dressed provocatively is not the same as saying that there is a correlation between the way girls dress and sexual assaults...

Perhaps you're just an ineffective writer. This is the logical flow of your argument:

1) Men (or some men) are turned on by females who dress provocatively. Although the original point in this thread focussed on "tween" girls, I'll assume that you're talking about young teenagers with some degree of sexual maturity.

2) Most of said men are able to control said impulses, but some are not.

3) Those men may/will then assault the provocatively dressed girl.

That is what you argued. The obvious, logical conclusion from such an argument is that girls who dress "like sluts" are at greater risk of sexual assault that more conservatively dressed teens.

Regardless, you say that's not what you meant, so there's no point in arguing the point any further.

If the fact that I have admitted being turned on by a young girl dressed up like a 25 year old is a problem for you... then please say so.....

It's not. I'm not the one suggesting that the world is going to hell in a hand basket because some teens dress provocatively.

 

[solitaria]

I was wondering how long it would take someone to through this red herring at Solitara. The fact that you care or worry about a child does not even remotely make you more qualified than him to discuss this issue, or to understand what happened. Emotional proximity does not necessarily equal insight or wisdom.

The only reason he threw it at me is b/c he went through ALL my posts looking for an edge and read how I am a Gen-Xer and he hoped that would disqualify my opinion since he doesn't have the intelligence to process my arguments with complex emotional depth. He has zero perception and insight when it comes to reading people and situations past a very basic level and in hindsight. He could be the father of 15 13yo girls and he still wouldn't have a clue past his trite motivational speeches that he thinks make him sound like a tough and disciplined thinker with a winners' mindset (but in reality I doubt he can even convince himself of that). Only a simpleton would think you could broad brush those heavily coined phrases MPANewbie employs to everything in life and think they apply never mind in situations involving rape and trauma.

PS Shake - I used "innocent" because it is a relative term and can be applied to most if not all 13 year olds as compared to the mindset of her would-be-predator or a mature adult with life experience.

 

[lomotil]

There is a billion dollar cosmetic and garment industry fueled by young ladies
trying to look sexy and an even bigger industry by older ladies trying to turn back the clock. Men are biologically programmed to look at young, healthy
sexual mature females. since they are most likely to have the highest chance
of fertility and the age of the onset of sexual maturity is obviously dropping, as compared with previous generations. The mental age for sexual responsibility, ie the ability to care for offsprings however is not keeping up.
So we have these ripe, physically attractive Lolita type girls openly advertising their new found sexuality, with encouragement from media and sometimes even parents. Of course men will look, and in a civilized society such as in N. America, most men know it is unacceptable to cross certain
moral and legal borders with respect to these young ladies, ie statutory rape
laws. Many older women are seething with rage over the loss of their former beauty of youth, and go often go balistic at the attention levels that young
ladies receive from men. Older women should relieve that they can never compete physical with the beauty of youth, but only compete mental with
the charm, maturity and sophistication that comes with age and experience.

 

[lomotil]

(continued)

I was in the 24 hour Dominion at 12 am the other day, and I could not help
but over hear the conversation between a mother in her mid to late 40's and her 14 year old full figured daughter, who was wearing form fitting sweat pants with the words " luscious " across her derriere. The two were heatedly arguing about the conflict tomorrow with the mother's Botox injection appointment and her daughter's appointment with her math tutor as the daughter busily played with her Gameboy.

p.s. Shakespeare said something like: a rose will bloom , it then will fade
so dies a youth, so dies the fairest
maid

 

[booboobear]

(1) It depends on what kind of bikini top, i.e. I think the implication is that it's "inappropriately skimpy" in this case.

(2) sometimes, we must remember, certain kinds of clothing can be more "obscene" than honest nudity. Thus, an 8 yr old child at a nude beach is actually less disturbing than an 8 yr old child dressed like an 18 yr old slut...

I agree w ith you actually an 8 yr old girl nude at a beach should not be disturbing to anyone. A 10 yr old with suggestive words written on her rear

or a 12 yr old with her ass exposed on the street would be considered
suggestive or inapproiate .

I don't understand those who think it's ok for very young girls to wear clothes with sexual remarks.

 

[The Shake]

I don't understand those who think it's ok for very young girls to wear clothes with sexual remarks.

Boobie - What age group do you feel this sort of clothing is appropriate for?

 

[lomotil]

Boobie - What age group do you feel this sort of clothing is appropriate for?

It could be argued that this sort of clothing is appropriate for all ages, if the
person wearing the clothes is above the age of sexual consent, then it is the
wearers responsibility, if below the age of consent then it is the parent or
guardians responsibilty for the clothing choice and the attention and possible
consequences of their choices. To each his own, as there are no rules or
regulations in this country pertaining to attire, except public nudity, with even
going topless legal in Ontario at present as long as the genitals are covered.

Would it be considered child abuse if children below the age of consent are
being allowed to wear very provacative clothing, with Children's Aid being called in as it would appear this is not the case?

 

[slowandeasy]

Perhaps you're just an ineffective writer. This is the logical flow of your argument:

1) Men (or some men) are turned on by females who dress provocatively. Although the original point in this thread focussed on "tween" girls, I'll assume that you're talking about young teenagers with some degree of sexual maturity.

2) Most of said men are able to control said impulses, but some are not.

3) Those men may/will then assault the provocatively dressed girl.

That is what you argued. The obvious, logical conclusion from such an argument is that girls who dress "like sluts" are at greater risk of sexual assault that more conservatively dressed teens.

Regardless, you say that's not what you meant, so there's no point in arguing the point any further.



It's not. I'm not the one suggesting that the world is going to hell in a hand basket because some teens dress provocatively.

I may just be an ineffective writer.. and I appreciate your putting the argument in concise terms...

1. Personally, I do not know/understand or have studied the mind of the
sexual assailant or predator. However, I do believe that they have
different patterns of attack or chosing their victims.

2. My reference to the impulses was not clear... but your assumption is that
because I am may be sexually attracted to a young provacatively dressed
girl i would want to assault her because I cannot control my impulses...
I am not saying that if a man cannot control his impulse for a young girl
his next reaction would be to assault her.... or that men cannot control
their sexual impulses so they rape...... perhaps the man will endeavour to
seduce her young girl... this is an inappropriate behaviour in my opinion...

I agree there is no point arguing about the fact..

 

[The Shake]

2. My reference to the impulses was not clear... but your assumption is that
because I am may be sexually attracted to a young provacatively dressed
girl i would want to assault her because I cannot control my impulses...
I am not saying that if a man cannot control his impulse for a young girl
his next reaction would be to assault her.... or that men cannot control
their sexual impulses so they rape...... perhaps the man will endeavour to
seduce her young girl... this is an inappropriate behaviour in my opinion...

Okay - that's fair enough. I did assume that "not being able to control your/his impulses" implied sexual assault, and that was a mistaken assumption on my part.

 

[slowandeasy]

Are you trying to avoid work as well???

As with most of my arguments, in my mind what I am saying is clear, just does not seem that way sometimes..

 

[The Shake]

Are you trying to avoid work as well???

What was your first clue?

 

[booboobear]

Boobie - What age group do you feel this sort of clothing is appropriate for?

I can't say exactly but certainly not for 8-12 yr olds . I guess if you are a girl that wants attention and wants sex at 13 then that is your choice .
Some young girls will not follow rules that say consent starts at 14 so if that's the kind you are ok.
One things for sure clothing with sexual connotations will always attreact attention wanted and unwanted.

 

[The Shake]

You are so clearly a young snot nose kid who likes to play big man on message baords because in reality people push you around that it isn't even funny. You like to leverage intellectual superiority because its the only thing you've got...

As opposed to a middle-aged, frightened of the modern world loser who clings to Second-Rate Tony Robbins Nothing Speak to (quite ineffectually) mask his intellectual inferiority? Someone who, after losing an argument badly and making himself look fairly incapable of parenting a teenage girl, has to, repeatedly, focus on the "age" of his counterpart, rather than countering his points rationally?

Solie will eventually grow up. A solution to your problems, however, seems less likely.

 

[The Shake]

..before I waste my time any further.

Have YOU raised any teenage daughters?

Bwahahahaha. Because, of course, that would make my opinion more important than Solie's.

Because, you know, that simply experiencing something makes you an expert.

One would think that asking, "have you done an effective job of raising any teenage daughters" might be a slightly more relevant question, but even that misses the point.

The fact that you have worried about your daughter(s) doesn't mean that you understand her or - most importantly to this discussion - teenage girls in general. It does not mean that you were a good parent and it does not mean that by simply surviving her teenage years that you've been granted some incredible insight into things. Now, to be completely fair, it doesn't mean that those things aren't true, but you're seemingly limited understanding of how teenagers think (as opposed to your fairly accurate observations of how they behave) certainly suggests it. The point is, you are not an expert. Your experience certainly means that you have something to contribute, and a few of your posts provided some welcome input to the discussion. There many holes in Solie's arguments ("freedom of expression" being his most silly point) that you could deal with - suggesting that he has no credibility because "he's not a parent" is a loser's stand. Aren't you supposed to be a winner?

Because I don't know how the fuck anyone who has never been a parent is in position to lecture someone about being a parent,

I'm not sure where the discussion about your parenting skills (or lack thereof is), but the two of you have been rambling on for so long that I might have missed it. The discussion was on whether or not a 13 year old was responsible (even partially) for a sexual assault at the hands of much older man. As far as I can tell, Solie never challenged your credentials as it relates to sexual assault (although you did his), even though being a sexual assault survivor (or having worked with abuse victims) might seem quite relevant to the discussion.

Had he done so, though, it would have been as irrelevant as your "not a parent" rant. This is an anonymous forum. For the most, people do not show their cards at the table. Maybe I have five teenager daughters. Maybe I have one tween. Maybe I was a teenage girl. Maybe I still am. If I say so, does it make it true? Does something unverifiable suddenly add weight to a discussion? You can't really be that stupid, can you?

about understanding the teenage mind,

Few parents understand the teenage mind, that's why parenting teens is so difficult. Again, the fact that you have (or had) teenagers does not provide you with any inherent expertise on the subject - just experience - and, although experience is rarely a bad thing, simply having done something does not mean that you did it well, or learned anything from it.

or the best courses of action for keeping your kids on the straight and narrow.

I'll grant you that. I think that most parents, having survived the various stages of their children's lives, come out the other end with a good understanding of what worked - and what didn't.

So, answer me that first...

No, because it's not relevant. We're not talking about my daughters - or yours - we're talking about teenage girls in general. If you really believe that fathers have a particularly strong insight into the lives of their daughters - especially during that part of their lives - then you've never had a real discussion with a woman about the subject!

you ever have any teenage daughters under YOUR roof that YOU had to worry about where they were going and who they were dating?

What on Earth does that have to do with the subject at hand?

 

[The Shake]

...I suspect you are just as big a dweeb as he is....

Ummm, sure.

"Frightened of the modern world"....LOL. I do "ok" in the modern world, thank you very much. At least by all the measures that matter to me. They may not matter to you...being such a high minded intellecual...so intellectually superior to me...but I am happy.

I think you missed my point entirely. I took virtually every lazy generalization that one could take from your posts and through them into a big heaping insult. Much like what you did to Solie, the point being that pocket-analysis of people based on their postings on an escort board is a silly exercise. Just ask any woman who's met a client off of here - the first thing that she'll say is "he's nothing like he is on the boards".

"Intellecutal Inferoity"...as though ones "Intellectual Superioty" is the hallmark of what makes a difference in this world.

I quite agree with you on that, actually. Most of the great pleasures in life come from remarkable simple things.

I realize that might be all that YOU have, but it isn't the supreme pursuit for the rest of us...desperately trying to avoid "losing an arguement badly". Some of us have families, homes, jobs, careers. Other places to measure success beyond winning or losing an arguement on amessage board. Hell, I never even thought of it as something you "win"...just entertainment. I guess we all just have different things that are important to us.

See, this is where you just sound silly. I pretty much agree with everything that you've typed above. The thing is, you're behaving in exactly the same way. You've accused Solie - and now me - of having some great need to prove ourselves via these forums, yet you're the one who keeps on trumping his alleged life superiority. Pot and Kettle, anyone?

Face it, you are just an older version of what he is...a dweeb...here to use your "sharp mind" to prove yourself on a message board because every day IRL someone hands you your ass, more than likely.

Okay...

My problems I will take gladly (ok, some i could live without). Yours I wouldn't want any part off though...

Mmmm, I'd love to hear what those problems are.

"Solie" might in fact one day out grow his youth and say "wow, what an ass I was to think people cared how many books I had read and how many classed I had sat in.

Cuz, you know, all that book laaaarnnning ain't hold no scope in the real world...

How arrogant was it for me to lecture people who had lived through what I was theorizing about"

Hmmmm. I'm not so sure that he'll grow out of it. You appear to be living proof that arrogance doesn't fade with age.

For you alas, it is too late...

I'm crushed.

Really.

You seem like a lonely middle aged guy

Wow. That's me! Entirely! Dude, you're like Kreskin.

Or not.

who is desperately holding on to the one thing he always had - the fact that you could out sneer the next guy...always at the ready to prove once again to yourself just how smart you are.

Well, I do like to sneer.

BTW - My kid is doing ok. I give her mom most of the credit, but I'd like to think I had something to do with it. She seems to think so...

No, I just say that to keep you happy, Dad.

 

[solitaria]

There many holes in Solie's arguments ("freedom of expression" being his most silly point) that you could deal with - suggesting that he has no credibility because "he's not a parent" is a loser's stand. Aren't you supposed to be a winner?

Technically you are dismissing my arguments without adequately responding to them either. I'm not really interested in debating MPANewbie further because his arguments have about as much anger and direction as a drunk, raging bull that has just been kicked in the nuts and is seeing ten clowns.

I think "freedom of expression" is important for everyone. That is what of course makes us individuals. Isn't that the most important point countering the other side that suggests women should be careful/limited in terms of the choices they make in attire? I mean a woman that wears skimpy clothing might not put herself at greater risk of being raped (we can't know that for sure as there is not enough empirical evidence or scientific studies of that nature) but she sure is putting herself in a situation where she will at the very least get more unwanted/undesirable attention and why isn’t it better to be safe than sorry if that is the case? If freedom of expression isn't that important what is so bad in suggesting she dress more conservatively? The reason she doesn't dress more conservatively in spite of the unwanted attention she has to put up with is because it takes that "freedom of expression" away from her which is suffocating for the individuality of anyone and hence she will resist it at all costs. I don't think it is fair to think anyone should have to do that in order to feel safer nor should it be used to show culpability of the victim in terms of her rape being preventable.

 

[The Shake]

(because it kinda doesn't matter at this point, now does it?) because so many people simple blame others and move on. They are comfortable with being the victim.

The problem is that sexual assault victims, particularly those who are abused at a young age, invariably blame themselves. More to the point, so do others in society. That's dangerous and perpetuates myths about sexual assault. It's also a tool that the abusers use to control their victims. Wanting someone to learn from their mistakes is noble, suggesting that they are to blame for a violent crime against them (which is what Jersey has said) enables the predator.

 

[lickrolaine]

A lot of todays sex offenders are from decades where the dress codes were tighter,go figure.

 

[The Shake]

Technically you are dismissing my arguments without adequately responding to them either. I'm not really interested in debating MPANewbie further because his arguments have about as much anger and direction as a drunk, raging bull that has just been kicked in the nuts and is seeing ten clowns.

Stop being such a "dweeb".

 

[gibsomstreet]

A lot of todays sex offenders are from decades where the dress codes were tighter,go figure.

Also, anyone remember the "Blind Faith" cover from 1969?