Warning! Sensitive content! Proceed with caution!

[Riverwolf]

Who's doing that? Personally I've only called a spade a spade. I think it's those who insist such figures be revered and respected are those treating them if they're still living, or as if they were more than what they were.

It's pointless to judge individuals for following the times; judgment should be reserved for the living, IMO.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

I'm trying to figure out what's so sensitive about information that is considered common knowledge by many people. Not saying it's true or it's not true though.

 

[K.Venugopal]

It's pointless to judge individuals for following the times; judgment should be reserved for the living, IMO.

True but when the living see the individual in question as a role model for all times, then it is only natural to point out that at least certain aspects of the individual cannot be model behaviour in present times.

 

[Riverwolf]

True but when the living see the individual in question as a role model for all times, then it is only natural to point out that at least certain aspects of the individual cannot be model behaviour in present times.

I'm not arguing against that. In fact, I would argue that we need to do that.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

We all would prefer if most people would follow us instead of other people. I fail to see how you're unique in this regard.

Apart from your apparent lack of ability to separate seriousness and humor, I'm unique in the regard that most people would be better off if they followed what I said.

Kind of hard to see where I'm going with my eyes closed, no? 'Twould indeed make my job a lot harder.

Indeed, this certainly helps explain the difficulty.

Your continued reluctance to explain your stance is further telling me that you have no real logical or rational grounds for your stance, and that it's based purely on emotion.

Protiop: Your inability or unwillingness to understand what I'm saying doesn't mean it doesn't make rational sense. Try again.

 

[Riverwolf]

Apart from your apparent lack of ability to separate seriousness and humor, I'm unique in the regard that most people would be better off if they followed what I said.

And others think so, too. Therefore, I fail to see the uniqueness.

I can only catch exaggerated humor, otherwise, I need body language and voice.

Indeed, this certainly helps explain the difficulty.

'Scuse me?

Protiop: Your inability or unwillingness to understand what I'm saying doesn't mean it doesn't make rational sense. Try again.

You're not saying anything; that's the problem. Essentially, here's what you've been saying: "You're wrong, and you can't see why." You've given one post that actually presents an argument, which was rather easy to speak against.

Here was that argument: even a 9 or 10 year old girl entering puberty would still appear as a child, at least we would think so. After all, though she may look like a teenager, she would still think and act like a child. However, I put forward the idea that in those days, that didn't matter: once a girl was in puberty, she was ready for marriage. This seems to be the case considering how young women married in many of these cultures; even in Europe, girls sometimes got married as young as 14.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Here was that argument: even a 9 or 10 year old girl entering puberty would still appear as a child, at least we would think so. After all, though she may look like a teenager, she would still think and act like a child. However, I put forward the idea that in those days, that didn't matter: once a girl was in puberty, she was ready for marriage. This seems to be the case considering how young women married in many of these cultures; even in Europe, girls sometimes got married as young as 14.

Yes, I understand your attempt to rationalize an adult man having sex with a nine year old. Yes, I disagree a psychologically healthy man would ever be sexually attracted to a nine year old girl. Yes, I see the mental gymnastics you're attempting, to get me to agree that a healthy adult man would ever want to have sex with a nine year old.

 

[Skeptisch]

... I've only called a spade a spade. I think it's those who insist such figures be revered and respected are those treating them if they're still living, or as if they were more than what they were.

Kudos to you Father Heathen.
“With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion”.
Steven Weinberg,

 

[TashaN]

But what if it's not against their will? What if kids accept sex as a normal social interaction; seek it, enjoy it, initiate it?

In our culture children may or may not wish to be cuddled, dressed or bathed at a particular time. They may not want to be sent to school and separated from their parents. Are we abusing them if we force these on them? Are they traumatized?

Is circumcision abuse? Are chores slavery? In Israeli Kibbutzim children were raised in communal baby houses by special caretakers Parents could visit only a few hours a day. Children sometimes couldn't even identify their biological parents. This treatment produced adults with the highest average level of moral development (Kohlberg levels) ever measured. Was this abuse? Was it traumatic?

If a cultural practice is physically harmless, painless, pleasant and reassuring, can it be abusive?
We're taught what is normal, what's appropriate and inappropriate. These are learned cultural features. Bizarre as a practice might seem to our sensibilities, as traumatic as it would be to us, it must be measured in cultural context and by the universals of harm, pain, suffering, &c.

Things to think about.

That's really wise, but only few will admit it's the truth. Those who don't realize what you are saying are hiding behind masks of stubbornness and ignorance.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

That's really wise, but only few will admit it's the truth. Those who don't realize what you are saying are hiding behind masks of stubbornness and ignorance.

Or we see that a sexual relationship between a child and an adult can never be healthy, regardless of what the child may or may not express. People who pursue sexual relationships with children don't usually forceably rape them, but rather groom them over time and manipulate them into thinking they want to do it.

A sexual relationship between a child and adult, apart from the sexual perversity, already embodies too much of an imbalance in power. The exertion of this power over the child is inherent in these types of relationships, and is unhealthy for both parties.

There is never anything healthy about pedophilia, for either the children or the adult.

 

[Skeptisch]

There is never anything healthy about pedophilia, for either the children or the adult.

That's really wise, but only few will admit it's the truth. Those who don't realize what you are saying are hiding behind masks of stubbornness and ignorance.

 

[TashaN]

Or we see that a sexual relationship between a child and an adult can never be healthy, regardless of what the child may or may not express. People who pursue sexual relationships with children don't usually forceably rape them, but rather groom them over time and manipulate them into thinking they want to do it.

A sexual relationship between a child and adult, apart from the sexual perversity, already embodies too much of an imbalance in power. The exertion of this power over the child is inherent in these types of relationships, and is unhealthy for both parties.

There is never anything healthy about pedophilia, for either the children or the adult.

According to the experts in the field, you are wrong.

Scholars say that this behavior is a about a preference for that particular young age, it's not about the act itself. It's about the urge to be with a child instead of an adult.

from: Pedophilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As a medical diagnosis, pedophilia (or paedophilia) is defined as a psychiatric disorder in adults or late adolescents (persons age 16 or older) typically characterized by a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger, though onset of puberty may vary). The child must be at least five years younger in the case of adolescent pedophiles (16 or older) to be termed pedophilia.[1][2][3][4] The term has a range of definitions, as found in psychiatry, psychology, the vernacular, and law enforcement.

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) defines pedophilia as a "disorder of adult personality and behaviour" in which there is a sexual preference for children of prepubertal or early pubertal age.[5] According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), pedophilia is a paraphilia in which a person has intense and recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about prepubescent children and on which feelings they have either acted or which cause distress or interpersonal difficulty.[1] The current DSM-5 draft proposes to add hebephilia to the diagnostic criteria, and consequently to rename it to pedohebephilic disorder.[6]

This would not apply to someone in the past who merely got married as a natural thing in that society and in accordance with the norm, with whom we precieve as a child in today standard. Even if it happened today and the motivation was any other thing aside from what been described clinically, like culture for instance, it wouldn't be called pedophilia even if we deem it to be wrong.

From: Pedophilia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Misuse of medical terminology

The words "pedophile" and "pedophilia" are sometimes used informally to describe an adult's sexual interest or attraction to pubescent or post-pubescent teenagers and to other situations that do not fit within the clinical definitions. The terms "hebephilia" or "ephebophilia" may be more accurate in these cases.[2][33] This was especially seen in the case of Mark Foley during the congressional page incident. Most of the media labeled Foley a pedophile, which led David Tuller of Slate magazine to state that Foley was not a pedophile but rather an ephebophile.[113]

Another erroneous but unfortunately common usage of "pedophilia" is to refer to the actus reus itself (that is, interchangeably with "sexual abuse")[2][8][9][10] rather than the medical meaning, which is a preference for that age group on the part of the older individual.[11][12] Even more problematic are situations where the terms are misused to refer to relationships where the younger person is an adult of legal age, but is either perceived socially as being too young in comparison to their older partner, or the older partner occupies a position of authority over them.[114][115] Researchers recommend that these imprecise uses be avoided.[11][33]

So basiclly, pedophilia is a disorder, not something which a healthy society would practice and condone. It is the sole or primary interest in children alone aside from others. In most societies who cared for their tribe survival, they were after surviving and producing more males, not for enjoying being with a child. Their priorities and motivations were far different from the males of today.


So what is it we are talking about?

Are we talking about a clinically well defined disorder called "pedophilia" or we are talking about "sexual abuse" in general?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

So what is it we are talking about?

Are we talking about a clinically well defined disorder called "pedophilia" or we are talking about "sexual abuse" in general?

Any way you try to slice it up, I'm talking about that it's never healthy for an adult man to have sex with, or want to have sex with, a nine year old girl. I'm just amused by the lengths people will go to to attempt to rationalize such a situation when if it was their daughter, they'd never think twice about it being obviously wrong.

 

[TashaN]

Do you care to address the historical arguments made against the account that states that he married her at nine? Are you also able to prove that he had sex with her if he did marry her at a young age?

Or is this kind of misrepresentation all you intend to offer on the subject?

What if he got married with her while she was nine? what if it wasn't her *spiritul age* as some have sugguested?

Would that bother you? if yes, in what way? if no, why not?

 

[TashaN]

Any way you try to slice it up, I'm talking about that it's never healthy for an adult man to have sex with, or want to have sex with, a nine year old girl. I'm just amused by the lengths people will go to to attempt to rationalize such a situation when if it was their daughter, they'd never think twice about it being obviously wrong.

Are you running away from the discussion by using scare tactics and misrepresentation for what others and i are talking about?

If all what you are interested in is your own opnion being bullet proof then i really don't want to waste my time to reply to you. I don't even know why you are spoiling the discussion if you are not willing to listen to others and if you already have made up your mind and keep using the same old argument of *guys, it's wrong, believe me, i'm telling you.*

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Are you running away from the discussion by using scare tactics and misrepresentation for what others and me are talking about?

I've simply yet to hear an actual rational argument why an adult male having sex with a nine year old girl would ever be okay. If you have one, I'd love to hear it and consider it.

 

[Badran]

What if he got married with her while she was nine? what if it wasn't her *spiritul age* as some have sugguested?

Would that bother you? if yes, in what way? if no, why not?

If he married her at nine, and had sex with her, that would bother me. It would bother me because whether or not that society was okay with this he would've known its not okay, since he's a prophet of god. At least i would expect so, considering how serious the consequences could be for the child.

The question is simply regarding whether or not she was ready for this at that age. If he did marry her and have sex with her at nine, that leaves a lot of questions to be addressed, and makes the incredibly more likely conclusion that he did something that at least could have hurt her pretty badly, but apparently, luckily didn't.

 

[Father Heathen]

Wait...
Did you just try to compare Mohammeds marriage to a nine year old to the holocaust?

No. I was however applying Riverwolf's logic regarding ethics, assuming that it's consistent, to the holocaust.

Wow.
Seriously?
Are you going to claim that YOUR emotional ranting and raving in this thread is somehow a better source for morality than God?

Obviously what I said was lost on you, especially if you've considered it an "emotional rant". People say that the actions reflect the culture of the time, but if someone is supposedly guided by and represents god, then shouldn't god's standards, which I presume would be timeless, supersede the standards of a human culture?

Seems you are either grasping at straws, or are merely still working through your emotional rant.

I think it's those who have to twist what I say in order to make an argument who are grasping at straws.

 

[TashaN]

I've simply yet to hear an actual rational argument why an adult male having sex with a nine year old girl would ever be okay. If you have one, I'd love to hear it and consider it.

Sorry, i lost interest.

You failed to challenge what been presented by myself and others and you merely dismissed it as irrational without making any effort to discuss it. You keep repeating the same argument all over and over without considering what others are trying to say, so, good luck with that.

 

[Badran]

Sorry, i lost interest.

You failed to challenge what been presented by myself and others and you merely dismissed it as irrational without making any effort to discuss it. You keep repeating the same argument all over and over without considering what others are trying to say, so, good luck with that.

To clarify, in case you felt my reply too neglected what you're trying to say, i'm not. I understand where you're coming from. And i'm not saying that if he married her at nine then it meets the criteria for him to be labeled pedophile, or that it has to be wrong and disgusting etc...

I understand the distinction you made for starters, considering what is a pedophile. I'm merely however saying what is more likely based on what we know. That is, that marrying her at that age would be incredibly more likely to be something i would label as wrong. Like i said in the first post though, there could be other differences at play here that i'm not aware of that makes a difference in the conclusion. I'm simply unaware of them.

Also, since it is possible for this account to be referring to her spiritual age, and possible that its inaccurate all together, i'm also emphasizing that we don't actually know that for sure, that he did marry her at that age.