Now see, that's a bait and switch argument. There aren't any? Not one anywhere in the world? I won't foolishly stumble into the trap of claiming that. At any time there's some crazy MD or former-MD somewhere who believes some fucked up shit. Blowing compressed CO2 up your anus will lead to increased energy. Eating a diet of Romaine lettuce will lead to increased lean body mass. Hanging from gravity boots will decrease tumors. Something.bennyonesix wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:06 amAnd if you think there aren't medical doctors and psychs arguing for...
I don't necessarily think there aren't ANY. But that's not relevant to discussing what standard medical practice is.
That would represent quite a change from the current medical consensus, which is that these surivors suffer later in life. PTSD, depression, falling grades, high crime rates, failed marriages, heart disease, yadda yadda yadda. The community of teachers, pediatricians, social workers, school administrators, nurses, PTA presidents, etc etc are all in agreement on sexual exploitation of children*. That's not something that's going to change anytime soon.bennyonesix wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:12 amYou will have legions of MDs and Psychs and researchers pushing studies that indicate children can consent to sex and that the relationships are healthy.
(*"And if you think there aren't any teachers" – No, I'm not going to claim there aren't any teachers, I see the news. But those fuckers get rooted out and prosecuted. Not quickly enough, but surely.)
I mean, they've always been arguing that, right? Wikipedia sez NAMBLA was founded in '78.bennyonesix wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:12 amMoreover, you will have pedos arguing that this is how they were born and they only mean the children well.
WTF are you talking about? How is Facebook going to convince us of anything remotely like that?bennyonesix wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:06 amWhy wait until Facebook pressures you into sacrificing your kids?
I'm beginning to suspect that you're not a parent. Are you?
Tough to expect rational counter-arguments to a hypothetical position that seems so shrill and unlikely. I don't think any of us accepts your premises. Actually I'm not sure I understand them.bennyonesix wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:12 amWhat is you people's response?
What intellectual arguments will you deploy?
Playing along, I guess my own argument would go something along the lines of, "That's counter to every longitudinal study of survivors of child sexual abuse that exists, and if you try to touch my son I'll fucking kill you." Perhaps not completely intellectual, but it will be persuasive.
Maybe you can't. The majority of society seems quite able to.