[Mark]

Maybe its one of the many archaic laws still in the books from our early founding based on a life expectancy of 40-50 back then.

[Hank]

The founding fathers assumed parents are best to look after their young. Keep in mind, in those days a lot of marriages were arranged. The age of consent was 10-12 years, inherited from English statues and adapted by various states. This changed in the 1890s, to what it is now.

[Mark]

Thanks Professor.

[Balls of Steel Forever]

Phredreeke, on 23 February 2021 - 01:16 PM, said:

Why the hell should a western country recognise a marriage performed to a twelve year old?



By this do you mean both criteria has to be met or just one or the other?

1. Some states are super fucking backwards.
I massively disagree with that.

2.
16, 18
17, 19 fine
People are in high school

14, 12
13, 15
Etc.
Etc.

That way the law is clear and people don't fuck shit up.

2 year law takes precedence over age of consent. Like how it does in most stayes already.

[Forge]

Hank, on 23 February 2021 - 04:18 PM, said:

Keep in mind, in those days a lot of marriages were arranged. The age of consent was 10-12 years, inherited from English statues and adapted by various states. This changed in the 1890s, to what it is now.

keep in mind there was no 'age of consent'. Women were treated like property, had no rights, and were traded to families for financial and inheritance ties. Old enough to bleed, old enough to produce an heir. If they survived child-birth they were relegated to staying in the back of the house and staying quiet.

[gemeaux333]

Forge, on 23 February 2021 - 11:28 AM, said:

i'm not infatuated with some teen girl; I didn't invest that much time in researching the show's creation.
So that would make her 13 to 14 during the first couple of seasons. Probably still legal somewhere - maybe some middle eastern or african muslim nations.
Hard pass on looking up the other shows you mentioned where she might even be younger.

Not really helping yourself out, but at least your honest about your addiction

I am 33 (most of the fans of Ocean Girl who watched the show back in the 90s and early 2000s are now in their 30s) and not infatuated to anything, and Marzena Godecki have been chosen among 500 girls applying for her role, the strenghs that allowed her to get the role were to make dance/ballet studies that granted her to be athletic and have a gracefull style and the fact she was unafected by the cold waters of the seas around Melbourne, it was mostly an afterschool job for her and after 5 years having the same role she felt the need to move on (one of the reason the show ended asside from the fact that Disney stopped backing foreign production, and that she and Jonathan M. Shiff considered everythng was told back then), she only acted in Round The Twist and Ocean Girl, and in 1996 she already spent most of her time away from ocean girl to concentrate on her studies, after the show ended she wanted to become veterinarian but never succeeded in securing a place at university, so since 1998 she is fashion designer and everything goes for the best for her

[Hank]

Forge, on 24 February 2021 - 07:38 AM, said:

keep in mind there was no 'age of consent'. Women were treated like property, had no rights, and were traded to families for financial and inheritance ties. Old enough to bleed, old enough to produce an heir. If they survived child-birth they were relegated to staying in the back of the house and staying quiet.

Thus, real professors claim. Take some facts, extrapolate it and bang, a hundred years later we have Pelosi and Walters, and all those other poor females, now liberated. Unless you actually believe only the females suffered under those specific aristocracy practices.

Well, I have some faith in compassion of the people, including the males towards their woman and offspring, in those oh so terrible times.

As for the age of consent, do a proper duckduckgo, the facts are still available.

[Aristotle Gumball]

Hank, on 24 February 2021 - 09:36 AM, said:

Well, I have some faith in compassion of the people, including the males towards their woman and offspring, in those oh so terrible times.

Haha, I don't. I am the first in my family to grow up entirely in an urban environment; my whole family (both sides) were farmers going back at least 400 years. If you're the sensitive kid, older women naturally gravitate towards you when you're young. Oh, the stories I heard. We have a famous book in Estonia called Truth and Justice (the film is good too!) that talks about the rich and the poor during the late 1800s/early 1900s, and from what my grandma and great grandma told me, I'd say that the book's depiction of the lives of women during that period is fairly accurate. Doesn't matter if you're white, black or purple, people behave in predictable ways. India and the Middle East today is what Europe and the Americas were like a hundred/two-hundred years ago.

Forge, on 24 February 2021 - 07:38 AM, said:

keep in mind there was no 'age of consent'. Women were treated like property, had no rights, and were traded to families for financial and inheritance ties. Old enough to bleed, old enough to produce an heir. If they survived child-birth they were relegated to staying in the back of the house and staying quiet.

I remember one of these videos with a title like "Jordan Peterson argues with a feminist", but this time it was an actual scholar, so they were somewhat evenly matched in terms of expertise in their respective fields. What shocked me wasn't when Peterson denied that the US is still a patriarchy, but when he argued there never has been a patriarchy. That's insanely ignorant. Why did women always take their husband's surname when getting married? It was to symbolize the transference of ownership from the woman's father to her husband. Peterson was stumped by that.

[Danukem]

I'm not very familiar with Peterson, but that comment made me think of something.

People who are used to being the smartest person in the room are often terrible debaters and advance the worst generalizations. I was fortunate enough to be in a graduate program during my formative intellectual years when I was around some very brilliant minds who often disagreed with me. If it hadn't been for that, I probably would have retained the arrogance that I had acquired during high school. What happens with the arrogant people who aren't around intelligent opposition is that they can get away with mistakes because the people they disagree with aren't able to capitalize on them. I also suspect that after a while, they become intellectually lazy and incompetent to the point where they are no longer capable of recognizing a good rebuttal when they encounter it. If you are used to dealing with smart opposition, you learn to be very careful in advancing your claims -- and especially you learn not to advance a generalization that is more broad than you can defend.

Since I work at a martial arts school, I see a parallel between how people develop as fighters and debaters. The person who is used to being the most skilled fighter in the gym and doesn't have strong competition will develop bad habits. For example maybe they will drop their hands after throwing a combination. If the people they are sparring with aren't fast or skilled enough, the star fighter can get away with this at his own gym, but when he meets top level competition he will get wrecked.

[Aristotle Gumball]

Danukem, on 24 February 2021 - 01:49 PM, said:

What happens with the arrogant people who aren't around intelligent opposition is that they can get away with mistakes because the people they disagree with aren't able to capitalize on them.

Agreed with everything you said, but I think the risk of being cancelled is a big factor. James Damore wanted a debate when he published his memo internally at Google. He sent it to a group called "fact checkers". It got leaked, he got fired, and then publicly humiliated.

All relatively smart people these days seem to stay within the permitted lanes dictated by their in-group. They might advance the most intelligent form of the in-groups general worldview, but there are so few who are willing to step out of the herd. I know this has always been the case, but seems like it is now more than ever. It's just safer to exist within an echo chamber. Not only mentally, but physically, socially, financially, etc.

One person who I believe is worth paying attention to is Eric Weinstein. He's the guy who coined the phrase "intellectual dark web" and while I would say he generally holds quite left leaning values, he is willing to debate people like Ben Shapiro, Ted Cruz and fucking Glenn Beck of all people. His academic & family history is interesting in itself, but I admire his courage above all else. I honestly can't name another left winger who will do what he is doing.

For all you Fox News fans out there:

[Balls of Steel Forever]

Honestly I just want to be in my room and fuck myself.
If more people, not all, shared this sentiment the world would be a better place.

[Forge]

Hank, on 24 February 2021 - 09:36 AM, said:

As for the age of consent, do a proper duckduckgo, the facts are still available.

The "age of consent" dates back to greco-roman times and usually is based on biological development (e.g. exactly what I posted - old enough to bleed, old enough to produce an heir). But for property, titles, treaties, and the like, the girls could be married off as early as 7 years old.

The U.S. Census Bureau did not link age with marital status till 1880

unless you're convoluting "consent" in the "age of consent" with those 10 to 12 year olds actually having a say in the matter in most of those arrangements prior to the 1900's, I'm not sure what your point is.

as for your tangent about women's rights throughout history:
when the majority of the time the majority of the people were serfs and none of them had rights - then yes, there was a lot of "equality". Except for the elites where women in positions of power usually got their power through marriage, inheritance, or relationships.
Personally I don't give a damn about suffrage or rights to a free ride. If you don't have a job, or have served in the armed forces, or pay taxes, or own property, you shouldn't have a say in who gets elected and how the government spends the collected tax monies, but you still deserve basic human rights.
Stalking and perving on 12 year olds is not a basic human right.


also:
#GlennBeckRapedAndMurderedAYoungGirlIn1990

[Aristotle Gumball]

We legit have a dude on this forum who jerks it to teenage mermaids.

[Forge]

ImmanuelCunt, on 25 February 2021 - 07:12 AM, said:

We legit have a dude on this forum who jerks it to teenage mermaids.

lol

gemeaux333, on 24 February 2021 - 09:03 AM, said:

not infatuated to anything....

goes on to post stalker level info on their crush

[gemeaux333]

I said nothing more than what you can find in interviews or wikis, besides none of the mermaids from Ocean Girl or H2O universes are teens anymore

[Aristotle Gumball]

So walk us through your process; do you pause on a bikini shot or rewind yr favorite scenes? What type of lube do you use? Are you a candles & incense, silk napkins-kind of gentleman, or do you like a more quick n dirty approach?

Do you close the curtains when you do it?

[gemeaux333]

I do nothing of the kind actually mate

Asside from wikis and Imdb there are the fansites on the net, and sometimes an interview related to the show (actors, producers, etc...) are linked on the social networks, thats not a big deal

[Aristotle Gumball]

gemeaux333, on 25 February 2021 - 09:48 AM, said:

I do nothing of the kind actually mate

Assplay? Should've known you'd be a kinky fucker. French after all.

Edit: So this doesn't get too off topic, here is a list of Frenchies who called "for the abrogation of several articles of the age of consent law and the decriminalization of all consensual relations between adults and minors below the age of fifteen".

They are basically all of the people who would be later known as the postmodernists.

“Libération, the newspaper co-founded by Sartre, championed pedophiles as a discriminated minority and ran personal ads by adults seeking children for sex.”

[Hank]

Forge, on 25 February 2021 - 06:48 AM, said:

The "age of consent" dates back to greco-roman times and usually is based on biological development (e.g. exactly what I posted - old enough to bleed, old enough to produce an heir). But for property, titles, treaties, and the like, the girls could be married off as early as 7 years old.

The U.S. Census Bureau did not link age with marital status till 1880

unless you're convoluting "consent" in the "age of consent" with those 10 to 12 year olds actually having a say in the matter in most of those arrangements prior to the 1900's, I'm not sure what your point is.

as for your tangent about women's rights throughout history:
when the majority of the time the majority of the people were serfs and none of them had rights - then yes, there was a lot of "equality". Except for the elites where women in positions of power usually got their power through marriage, inheritance, or relationships.
Personally I don't give a damn about suffrage or rights to a free ride. If you don't have a job, or have served in the armed forces, or pay taxes, or own property, you shouldn't have a say in who gets elected and how the government spends the collected tax monies, but you still deserve basic human rights.
Stalking and perving on 12 year olds is not a basic human right.


also:
#GlennBeckRapedAndMurderedAYoungGirlIn1990

My original stand was and is, children should be looked after first and foremost by their parents, and not government.

Age of consent for SEXUAL UNION. Not sure what is so ambiguous about it.

Looking through history, and finding horrible instances about abuse, to embrace the new and improved government sanctioned way of living, sorry dude, no can do. We are vicious predators. The new marriage definition will not change that. Equality, on paper, will not change that. Today, the women shelters are overflowing with seriously abused women. The plights of children have not changed. - All what has changed is that male and female are now equally the property of the government and are forced to pay tribute to their masters, aka taxes.

As you may remember I have little use for government. If voting were important, voting would not be allowed.

The above, my never humble opinions, only.

[Phredreeke]

ImmanuelCunt, on 25 February 2021 - 11:28 AM, said:

Edit: So this doesn't get too off topic, here is a list of Frenchies who called "for the abrogation of several articles of the age of consent law and the decriminalization of all consensual relations between adults and minors below the age of fifteen".

They are basically all of the people who would be later known as the postmodernists.

“Libération, the newspaper co-founded by Sartre, championed pedophiles as a discriminated minority and ran personal ads by adults seeking children for sex.”

Why do you think France has been sheltering Roman Polanski for the last four decades?

[Forge]

Hank, on 25 February 2021 - 01:14 PM, said:

My original stand was and is, children should be looked after first and foremost by their parents, and not government.

Age of consent for SEXUAL UNION. Not sure what is so ambiguous about it.

All what has changed is that male and female are now equally the property of the government and are forced to pay tribute to their masters, aka taxes.

you were ambiguous because you went on some tirade about women's rights being the root of all evil and now we have pelosi to deal with.

historically the age of consent has nothing to do with what the female in the equation wants. (and on a significant portion of the elite arrangements, the boy had no input on the matter). It has to do with property rights and later government taxes on the properties & government recognition of property transfer, so some uncle or brother can't come in and lay rights to a hunk of land or money that was transferred in a dowry.
The 'consent' part has to do with the male (or the parents) consenting to the acceptance of the female being of age to consummate the marriage to make it legally binding, and to produce an heir and keeping the property in their lineage.

Only in recent history (the last couple hundred years or so) has the female had much of a say in the matter.

modern day creepers just want something innocent to violate and control

[Aristotle Gumball]

Phredreeke, on 26 February 2021 - 01:24 AM, said:

Why do you think France has been sheltering Roman Polanski for the last four decades?

Good point. I bet Polanski watches Ocean Girl too.

[Jimmy]

ImmanuelCunt, on 24 February 2021 - 02:24 PM, said:

Eric Weinstein

ImmanuelCunt, on 25 February 2021 - 07:12 AM, said:

We legit have a dude on this forum who jerks it to teenage mermaids.

We used to have a guy who jerked off to robots.

[Aristotle Gumball]

Jimmy, on 27 February 2021 - 10:04 AM, said:

Dillon

I agree to an extent, even though this is just banter (he loves both of those dudes/has gone on their podcasts recently). The only annoying thing about Weinstein is his Geometric Unity BS (unless it turns out not be BS) and Fridman is kind of a moron/misrepresents himself, but he gets high quality guests so I watch him.

[Hank]

Forge, on 26 February 2021 - 08:45 AM, said:

you were ambiguous because you went on some tirade about women's rights being the root of all evil and now we have pelosi to deal with.

Please forgive me, let me rephrase the tirade into the current new-speak.

The ever-lasting struggle for equality of women has now been further advanced, by Congress, with new house rules eliminating confusing terms such as mother, father, son, aunt, daughter and much more. House Speaker Pelosi is proud to have had a significant role in re-writing the dictionary and loves the fact that Liz Cheney is now no longer just a chairwomen but a full fledged chair, with arm rests and four legs.

There is equality and freedom for all I support, and idiocy I do not.

Forge, on 26 February 2021 - 08:45 AM, said:

modern day creepers just want something innocent to violate and control

Modern day politically correct intellectuals are arguing that pedophilia is a sexual orientation, new-speak for this is ‘Minor Attracted Persons'. Not to be confused with a child molester, which unfortunately, is still a crime, in some backward countries. California however, where the subject is being taught as such in schools, as per superintendent Kerrie Torres (another emancipated individual), looks a promising state to lead the rest of the nation to further advance equality for all.

[Forge]

Hank, on 01 March 2021 - 07:29 PM, said:

Modern day politically correct intellectuals

yes. creepers.

the problem is as it was before. Parents usually have the final say on the 'consent' part.
in days gone by, it was for marriage and property
in modern days, we get creeper parents that let their children get molested because it's progressive and enlightened. Then they sign them up for gender re-assignment because they've damaged the kid's psyche.