Re: how do modern day egyptians feel about the ancient egyptians?

From: Yog-Sothoth (Allotrios_at_gmail.com)
Date: 09/25/04 

Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 02:20:57 +0100

Goat like "Tom McDonald" <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net> while
grazing in <10l912bp0ca8b9@corp.supernews.com>, made the following
shapes:
> Yog-Sothoth wrote:
> > Goat like "Tom McDonald" <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net> while
> > grazing in <10l6nt8j3luu845@corp.supernews.com>, made the following
> > shapes:
> >
> >>Yog-Sothoth wrote:
> >>
> >>>Goat like "Kendall K. Down" <webmaster@diggingsonline.com> while
> >>>grazing in <e24cc9f24c.diggings@diggingsonline.com>, made the
> >>>following shapes:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>In message <MPG.1bbc104d73549d098acf0@news.demon.co.uk>
> >>>> Yog-Sothoth <Allotrios@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>He had sex with a 9 year old. For ***'s sake if this was not rape
> >>>>>then nothing is.
> >>>>
> >>>>Rape is non-consensual sex. Look it up in the dictionary. There is no
> >>>>evidence that the girl was not consenting.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>And you think a 9year old has adequate experience to know what she is
> >>>consenting to? That's why we have laws that ban underage sex
> >>>regardless whether the subject consents or not.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Please note that I am not defending sex with under-age girls; however
> >>>>marriage with young girls is an established part of many cultures and
> >>>>Mohammed was not particularly evil for doing what his culture approved of.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Do you mean his culture was evil? Shouldn't Mohammed being wise and
> >>>all do the proper thing?
> >>>
> >>>Paedophilia is not only wrong in a particular social context. It is
> >>>physically and psychologically wrong because the victim is not ready
> >>>for sexual relations.
> >>
> >> You will, of course, provide us with evidence that this is a
> >>universal in all cultures at all times.
> >
> >
> > Are you serious? You need evidence that it is harmful to have sex
> > with someone who is not ready for it? Or do you mean you actually
> > believe that it is NOT harmful to have sex with a 9 year old girl
> > regardless of the social context?
>
> Nice straw men. "...it is harmful to have sex with someone who
> is not ready for it" is begging the question. Of course that is
> true. But you haven't demonstrated that all girls under the age
> of, say, 12 are not ready for it. As Katherine noted, at least
> some girls in ancient times reached menarche as early as age 7;
> and some 10-year-olds appear to have borne children.

I don't have to demonstrate that. And Katherine didn't bring any
evidence that there are girls at that age who are sexually mature.
Yet you take her word for granted even though the vast majority of
girls at that age is definitely biologically not ready.

> Your second question is of the same nature, which you may
> consider answered above.

So basically you tell me that sometimes (that be 1 out of 1 billion
probably) it is justified to have sex with a 9 year old. Well allow
me to laugh at the idea that Mohammed chose that girl at 6 because he
knew that at 9 she'd be mature.

> If, as is undeniably true, it isn't possible to reliably define
> an age of menarche; and if there is a cultural value that makes
> marriage and sexual activity with girls our culture would
> consider too young for such; then any attempt to set an absolute
> standard is not useful for the study of human society and
> culture, both now and in the past.
>
> That said, you sure can have your own standard, and may have
> the opinion you choose about those cultures that fall below that
> standard in your view. But no culture is required to consult
> with you or anyone else on their own standards.

Unless you display here evidence that a 9 year old can be BOTH
biologically and psychologically ready for sexual relations, your
point is moot. I strongly believe that even at 12, very few girls
reach maturity, and believe it or not, we haven't changed that much
in the past 1000 years.

<snipped>
> As for the issue of female sexuality, most cultures in the
> history (and pre-history) of the world would find our definition
> > I repeat. I don't care if his society thought it was ok to rape a 9
> > year old. I know for myself that it is harmful to the girls body and
> > mind and that's enough for me to condemn Mohammed as a paedophile.
>
> If it was rape, then I agree with you; and so would most
> cultures past and present. But if the 'rape' designation comes
> from our modern definition of a 9 year old as incapable of
> giving consent, then I don't feel competent to make that call in
> this case.

There is no question of it being rape or not, since at that age a
girl cannot be ready for it.

I suggest you have a look at this:

http://www.innocenceindanger.org/innocence/faq_clues.html#38

And particularly:

"2. Why are sexual relations with an adult traumatic for the child?

The expectations of the paedophile and those of the child are not the
same. Even when the children may sometimes appear consenting, if not
indeed provocative, they are actually seeking attention and
affection. The paedophile responds with an adult sexuality which
children are not equipped to understand or cope with as an adult
does, and which can only be traumatic for them. Even when the sexual
relationship is not experienced as such when it occurs, it will be so
later in adolescence, when the child becomes aware of what he/she has
undergone."

Quantcast