The Immorality of Sexual Abuse.

[John Tate]

I have had an interest in sexual ethics for some time – and I have consequentially noticed throughout history found almost a complete vacuum of any sexual ethics at all in a conceptualized fashion that can explicitly explain the issues with sexuality and Children (except what is implied through philosophies of natural rights barring force, for example). I find a lot of people have different views on sexuality outside the realm of consent. Political forces are considering changing the minimum age in different areas (higher or lower) among other things. This generally seems to stir a growing consensus that restrictions on age are simply arbitrary and often along with it that they are not worth considering. That phenomenon might also be attributed to the fact that interaction between older adolescents and younger adolescents is common on the Internet where in the past historically age groups have been separated by school grades – they are becoming integrated outside of that environment and outside of an environment of authority at all.

For years, I have sparked discussion in various Internet communities about the issue of children and sexuality. Most people cannot state a specific reason about child sexuality that makes it wrong. The usual response from people is aversion from discussion of such a grotesque subject, on purely emotional terms without the backing of any solid thought at all. This I believe is a sign of modern cultures lack of intellect and lack of ability to defend itself from growing movements seeking the “Liberation” of pedophiles and/or children. While most people completely ignore the subject and any debate of it out of disgust, growing organized groups try to rationalize that adults having sex with children is fine. Along with this is that growing amounts of adolescent try to rationalize sexual activities with younger and younger partners – probably due to reasons of integration I have established.

Something of which I have noticed over time is that most people have developed no reasoning to bring credit to the facts which surround the issue of sexuality and children. No effort is made I believe to rationally dismiss the crime as sexual abuse because the issue is generally considered to be held wrong by all. This instance of morality by consensus really is nothing more than consensus without rationality. Thus, various movements promoting the “Liberation” of pedophiles regularly target this specific fact surrounding the issue. Everyone is just saying “it is wrong.” Very few people are mentioning why.

Why is it wrong? First I will explain a key principle in Objective morality. These are the rights to life, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness. The right to pursue self-interest rationally – provided that does not infringe on the rights of others to pursue their own self-interest rationally. Thus, this demands the abolition of force and coercion from human relationships. The rights of a child do indeed bend on the basis that a child is not fully capable of making rational choices, and also that children are in a state of learning and forming convictions based on their surroundings. A child naturally trusts the adults around them, which leaves them open to learn our lessons. This also leaves children extremely impressionable. Thus, there are appropriate impressions that can be made upon children. To ensure a child can live morally, and pursue self-interest rationally it is important a child is taught to be able to rationalize appropriately.

To enter the sphere of sexual morality, sexuality comes with an implicit agreement on the terms which can be derived from the expression of sexuality. Two pointless people will come up with equally pointless terms. More developed and conceptualized people will have very different terms demanding very different levels of commitment in a relationship and the virtues they require. For a child regarding sexuality with another adult: the child will be unable to perceive the level of commitment to a relationship compared to an adult. Essentially a child is far less developed in concepts and choices are conceptual. Love is essentially a marriage between the concept of a relationship and all the virtues one demands within it. To a child, these demands and virtues are not known, and still being discovered. Thus any cry on the basis of love by an adult towards that child is essentially one-way. A child has no concepts to derive terms for a relationship. For any adult targeting children for a relationship, they are essentially going to set all the terms, and norms for the basis of that relationship and form what the child will agree with. Thus, anything goes in the relationship. While children should learn about their bodies, they should do it with their peers on the basis that they will be equally as absent of complex concepts of commitment.

With a child requiring the development of a rational mind, and sexuality between adults and children setting an almost unlimited possibility of norms on a child we can see that clearly sexuality between adults and children will do nothing to develop rational principles on which that child can live life as an adult. This impedes on a child’s right to be treated rationally, and sexuality between adults and children attacks a child’s conceptual faculty’s ability to form rational value-judgments.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

John,

I put this here in Chewing on Ideas since it seems more of a ramble than a developed article.

I agree that sexually abusing children is immoral.

There is an "age of consent" issue among libertarians whereby some think 14 years old is a reasonable age (usually because the biological equipment is ready) and others (like myself) believe that the mind takes longer to mature, so the age should be later. Also there is the issue of proximity in age. A 14 your-old fooling around with a 15 year-old is likely to not have scars and this is little more than adolescent shenanigans. But a 14 your-old fooling around with a 32 year old is another story.

I think all agree that really young children become psychologically damaged by sex with an adult. Some heal as they get older. Some don't. Whenever an adult does that sort of thing, he or she is committing a crime and should be punished.

Also, when you say "most people" this and "most people" that, you weaken your arguments unless there is something concrete you can point to (editorial line in newspapers or on TV, groups of people gathered and all doing the same thing, etc.).

Sometimes, it gets really shaky. For instance, in discussing pedophilia, you stated, "while most people completely ignore the subject and any debate of it out of disgust..." anyone can point to daily news shows on national TV, where the issue is brought up regularly, or very popular TV programs like NBC Dateline's To Catch a Predator with Chris Hansen, or the Dean Koontz best-seller, The Husband. The list goes on and on.

I agree that people like to posture about pedophilia and that this is an awkward subject at times since folks are so quick to condemn (at least this is how it has been in my own discussions and the ones I have observed), but I have seen no evidence of ignoring the subject. On the contrary, it is widely discussed in the mainstream media.

Michael

[tjohnson]

If an adult wants to have sexual relations with a child there is something wrong with the adult and in all likelihood they were abused as children themselves. This is how the vicious circle of emotional/physical/sexual abuse works and this is why we have laws against it. Your essay seems like a rather long convoluted way of saying this.

[Brant Gaede]

If an adult wants to have sexual relations with a child there is something wrong with the adult and in all likelihood they were abused as children themselves. This is how the vicious circle of emotional/physical/sexual abuse works and this is why we have laws against it. Your essay seems like a rather long convoluted way of saying this.

What a child needs before adolescence is love, acceptance and support. Not sex. Throw in sex and a monkey wrench is thrown into the psycho-sexual development.

Whatever positive case that might be made for sexual relations in adolescence the dangers and STD's and pregnancy basically obviate them. While I'm absolutely in favor of age of consent laws, I have no idea on where to draw the line and have given it little thought. There is, though, a lot of stupidity out there in various such laws and their enforcement.

--Brant

[tjohnson]

What a child needs before adolescence is love, acceptance and support. Not sex. Throw in sex and a monkey wrench is thrown into the psycho-sexual development.

Whatever positive case that might be made for sexual relations in adolescence the dangers and STD's and pregnancy basically obviate them. While I'm absolutely in favor of age of consent laws, I have no idea on where to draw the line and have given it little thought. There is, though, a lot of stupidity out there in various such laws and their enforcement.

--Brant

Yes, a line must be drawn and of course it is arbitrary just as in the abortion issue. Laws and law enforcement will never substitute for a good relationship with one's parents - they are there to try and protect children from screwed up adults.

[Selene]

Gentlemen:

Assume for the sake of this question, that teenager A and B are both 16. A is male and B is female.

Assume adult C and D are 26. C is male and D is female.

Do we have a different perspective to the possible teenager and adult relationship when the teenager is male or female?

Adam

[Judith]

I agree that sexually abusing children is immoral.

If an adult wants to have sexual relations with a child there is something wrong with the adult and in all likelihood they were abused as children themselves. This is how the vicious circle of emotional/physical/sexual abuse works and this is why we have laws against it. Your essay seems like a rather long convoluted way of saying this.

What a child needs before adolescence is love, acceptance and support. Not sex. Throw in sex and a monkey wrench is thrown into the psycho-sexual development.

So far, these responses seem to be proving the point made in the original post about everyone hastening to assure everyone else that they disapprove of children having sex, but no one really being willing to discuss it.

The question is, WHY is it bad or wrong for children to have sex, either with each other or with adults? And yes, I'm making the usual disclaimers that I don't think it's good for them either, yada, yada, yada, lest I be accused of approving of it simply by asking the question, as everyone seems to fear. But WHY? Vague generalities aren't answers.

Judith

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Judith,

I do not "disapprove of children having sex." Children having sex with each other can get confusing and reckless, but generally not traumatic. I am sure most of us have stories from our childhood. Also there is masturbation.

Still, I would not encourage children to jump into bed with each other with ease, nor would I encourage them to masturbate in public or discuss their masturbatory experiences in a school classroom.

A child needs to learn discretion with sex and hormones in overdrive are not conducive to adopting that lesson unaided. So the lesson has to come from adults.

I strongly disapprove of adults inducing or forcing children into having sex with them. This has to do with sex being an act of consent and the psychological scars adult-child sex produces in the child. (You should have heard what I did in NA meetings—one story after another.) Let's say that between a child and child, there is relative equality of "consent." But between an adult and a child, the adult will have more "consent" than the child. Don't think a child does not feel this. That is part of the scar.

Also, I have made a strong stand against the shameless smear of Jim Peron as a pedophile by grossly immoral people:

The Smearing of Jim Peron

So I disagree with your observation of me being unwilling to discuss these issues.

I agree that many people are afraid to get involved because of fear of getting tainted with a stigma. I will not condemn them because I have felt this and I know how difficult this issue is. Whether it is fair or not, most everybody thinks where there is smoke there is fire on unsavory issues like pedophilia.

But for me, I could not stay silent knowing what I know. The injustice was too great for me to ignore. I need to be able to look myself in the mirror and not avert my eyes in shame. Obviously, Peron's accusers follow another moral compass, although I doubt most of them have one in working order.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

I agree that sexually abusing children is immoral.

If an adult wants to have sexual relations with a child there is something wrong with the adult and in all likelihood they were abused as children themselves. This is how the vicious circle of emotional/physical/sexual abuse works and this is why we have laws against it. Your essay seems like a rather long convoluted way of saying this.

What a child needs before adolescence is love, acceptance and support. Not sex. Throw in sex and a monkey wrench is thrown into the psycho-sexual development.

So far, these responses seem to be proving the point made in the original post about everyone hastening to assure everyone else that they disapprove of children having sex, but no one really being willing to discuss it.

The question is, WHY is it bad or wrong for children to have sex, either with each other or with adults? And yes, I'm making the usual disclaimers that I don't think it's good for them either, yada, yada, yada, lest I be accused of approving of it simply by asking the question, as everyone seems to fear. But WHY? Vague generalities aren't answers.

Judith

As a practical matter, Judith, sexually transmitted diseases is enough reason. Some of these you get for life. Over 40 years ago it was generally thought that all STDs were effectively treatable, no more, even though some were pretty horrible, like lymphogranuloma venereum or granuloma inguinale.

--Brant

Edited March 6, 2009 by Brant Gaede

[tjohnson]

So far, these responses seem to be proving the point made in the original post about everyone hastening to assure everyone else that they disapprove of children having sex, but no one really being willing to discuss it.

The question is, WHY is it bad or wrong for children to have sex, either with each other or with adults? And yes, I'm making the usual disclaimers that I don't think it's good for them either, yada, yada, yada, lest I be accused of approving of it simply by asking the question, as everyone seems to fear. But WHY? Vague generalities aren't answers.

Judith

The answer is because it is harmful to children when adults coerce them into having sex with them. this is so obvious it hardly needs pointing out.