LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

[LazyTownWW]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

What if I fancy a puppet? :(

Hmmm...I once read a comment on YT that went like: "oh Ziggy...with his blonde, weavy hair...with his blue eyes...with his soft white skin...it melts me up when I look at him" ...you sure that wasen't you? lol joking

[Rowan]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

I might adopt Ziggy, but that's as far as it would go.

[LazyTownWW]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

I might adopt Ziggy, but that's as far as it would go.

Adopt him for what purposes ;) ?

[Rowan]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

I might adopt Ziggy, but that's as far as it would go.

Adopt him for what purposes ;) ?

No matter what I say, it's going to sound like a euphemism, so I'll just say innocent ones... :)

[lazymom]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

Ok. To throw my own two cents into the ring.

Some facts:

Statutory rape laws exist in most countries to protect children from inappropriate sexual relationships with adults. The age is roughly 16/18 depending on where you live.

Psychologists define normal sexual relationships as anything that goes on between two consenting adults. That means, depending on your local laws, anything between two people above the age of consent. If one party is below the age of consent, it is considered coercion by the older party.

Psychologists accept that sexual relationships go on between consenting adolescents but it is not considered abnormal unless one person involved in it is above the age of consent.

Human biology, and indeed human history has many examples of young girls (pre-pubescent, pubescent) being betrothed or married to older men. As a species we are wired to go after the younger females as they are perceived as being 'more fertile'.

MODERN human psychology, and indeed, human society has shown that the pursuit of children (below the age of consent) results in horrific mental, and biological implications for the girl or boy under the age of consent who is involved in sexual relationships. The younger the child, the more acute and horrific the consequences for such relationships. This is factual, and I can find and quote you thousand upon thousand of cases and studies to back this up.


I challenge you to find me any legitimate longitudinal study that shows underage sex between an older person and a child below the age of consent does not result in horrific mental and physical reprocussions for the child in question.

What does this mean to people who are sexually aroused by Stephanie?

1. Assuming that JRM was 16 years old (roughly) when Lazy Town was filmed, you are attracted to the physical characteristics of an under-developed 16 year old. (no obvious signs of puberty ie: large breasts, wider hips, are visible)

2. JRM was portraying an 8 year old girl, who was intended to not be overtly sexual, so you are attracted to girls who have seemingly innocent personalities.

3. If 16 years old is the age of consent in your country/state/municipality you are in luck if you can find an innocent-seeming under-developed 16 year old girl.

4. If 18 years old is the age of consent in your country/state/municipality you are in luck if you can find an innocent-seeming under-developed 18 year old girl.

5. If you pursue a female who is below the legal age of consent in your country/state/municipality you are breaking the law and will be punished accordingly.

6. If you masturbate over a female on a TV show/movie who is within the legal age of consent, you are not breaking the law.

7. If you masturbate over a female on a TV show/movie who is not within the legal age of consent, you are not breaking the law.

8. If you have an inappropriate sexual relationship with a child under the age of consent, and you personally are not also under the age of consent, you are breaking the law.


Assuming you are above the age of consent:

9. If you would never commit a sexual act with a child under the legal age of consent if you are above the legal age of consent, it is appropriate to enjoy being around children, or watching a child-like character on TV.

10. Masturbating over children who are under the age of consent (IN INNOCENT SITUATIONS - IE: NOT CHILD PORN OR SEXUAL SITUATIONS) enters into morally ambiguous territory. You will not go to jail for this however you should seek psychological help assessment and restrict your interactions with children.

11. Masturbating over children who are under the age of consent in sexual situations is a crime and you will go to jail for this and should absolutely seek psychological help and assessment, and severely restrict your interactions with children.


12. I would encourage anyone who enjoys masturbating over children who are in actuality below the legal age of consent to seek psychological counseling and assessment in order to explore the roots of your attraction, assessment of risk of acting out upon such desires, and risk of dealing and interacting with children. I would also encourage them to limit all interactions with children.



So: Masturbating or being sexually aroused by JRM/Stephanie? Not a crime, as the actress was 16 at time of filming. Touching up a 16 year old girl, if the age of consent in your territory is 18? A crime. Masturbating over children below the age of consent: A crime if the child is being sexually exploited, and you should seek psychological assessment. If the child is not being exploited, you should seek psychological assessment but it is not a crime per se.


Possessing Child Pornography: A crime. Having a sexual relationship with a child under the legal age of consent if you are above the legal age of consent: A crime.

As far as the people who are attracted to Magnus/Stebbi: There is no comparison as both men in question are well beyond any legal age of consent therefore there is no moral ambiguity regarding sexual attraction to either of them.

I hope this clears things up.

JRM was 12/13 during season 1

Then I would argue masturbating over JRM in season 1 is morally ambiguous and, while not a crime, enters into dangerous territory.

Society has drawn a line and while semantics can be argued back and forth, the fact is sexual attraction to children is not a crime, but is dangerous as there is a risk it can be acted upon. If you are sexually attracted to children, you should seek psychological help to manage your attraction so that you do not commit a crime.


Acting upon sexual attraction to children IS A CRIME.

[yhpets]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

JRM was 12/13 during season 1

[lazymom]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

JRM was 12/13 during season 1

Then I would argue masturbating over JRM in season 1 is morally ambiguous and, while not a crime, enters into dangerous territory.

Society has drawn a line and while semantics can be argued back and forth, the fact is sexual attraction to children is not a crime, but is dangerous as there is a risk it can be acted upon. If you are sexually attracted to children, you should seek psychological help to manage your attraction so that you do not commit a crime.


Acting upon sexual attraction to children IS A CRIME.

[Buzz]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

whats about her?....

[lazymom]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

I cannot comment as I don't know her age.

[yhpets]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

whats about her?....

Well that's a different matter, In japan innocence is sexy. maturity less so I think(lol backwards country)

Magibon is 21 or something right?

[Buzz]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

whats about her?....

Well that's a different matter, In japan innocence is sexy. maturity less so I think(lol backwards country)

Magibon is 21 or something right?

she is 23 but sometimes she looks quite innocent...

[PolarFox]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

That she is _http://encyclopediadramatica.com/Magibon

(See her ANOTHER photos :) )

[bungie]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

Statutory rape laws exist in most countries to protect children from inappropriate sexual relationships with adults. The age is roughly 16/18 depending on where you live.

These laws was voted mostly to prevent teen pregnancy only. They would not be able to take care of themselves. Basically they don't have income. It's more like a morality question - We let the 13yo girl suffer, because he left her, and their first born. You know. As of today, when the male dosen't want to have sex with her anymore - it's back to her parents.

Psychologists define normal sexual relationships as anything that goes on between two consenting adults. That means, depending on your local laws, anything between two people above the age of consent. If one party is below the age of consent, it is considered coercion by the older party.

Normal- word alert. In psychology few/none are 100 % A4-normal. You have also measured being normal against local laws. It's better to say it's not unusual to find girls between 11-16 sexual attractive. They are not children, they are - like you stated - younger and more fertile.

Human biology, and indeed human history has many examples of young girls (pre-pubescent, pubescent) being betrothed or married to older men. As a species we are wired to go after the younger females as they are perceived as being 'more fertile'.

It's even proved by genetic relationships in all primates (human, orangutans,..).

MODERN human psychology, and indeed, human society has shown that the pursuit of children (below the age of consent) results in horrific mental, and biological implications for the girl or boy under the age of consent who is involved in sexual relationships. The younger the child, the more acute and horrific the consequences for such relationships. This is factual, and I can find and quote you thousand upon thousand of cases and studies to back this up.

People suffer because their closest tell them to suffer. They hear it every day. Psychology will hear only what their trustee have instructed them to speech unless beaten or sanctioned.

A 12yo age of consent would be no problem at all. The limitations of pregnancy to marriage is better. It would also support our strongly needed population control.

[StingX]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

A 12yo age of consent would be no problem at all. The limitations of pregnancy to marriage is better. It would also support our strongly needed population control.

Let's not get this conversation started again.

[bungie]

Re: LazytownWW: "I'm really disappointed..."

Acting upon sexual attraction to children IS A CRIME.

Well, lazymom, that depends on the definition of child - doesn't it.

Let's not get this conversation started again.

Sorry