Consent Matters

Atheism
Politics
Memes
Mind
Matters
Random
Interact
Feedback
Email
Links
Forum
Home

Fashionable People
There's Nowt as Queer as Folk
Palace Admits Prince Charles is Gay
Circumcision
Feminism is a Bitch
Chick Food
Religion's Dirtiest Tricks
Let's Talk about Sex
GM Food
Eating Horses
Confessions of a Middle Aged English Hashish Eater
Women and Custom Cars
Teenage Sex
In Praise of Big Women
Sex Education
Sex and Evolution

I read your ‘roving eye’ page, and found it incredibly informative. I have been looking for a non-puritan view on the subject, and, though I may think that your views seem to be swinging a little to far to the other side of the spectrum, I respect that you had the courage to put your statements out there for those who, like me, are confused on the subject. I do have a few comments that, if you have the time, I wouldn’t mind hearing your opinion on. If you do not, I understand.

For context’s sake, I will tell you that I am a 23 year old female, and when I was fourteen years old I began dating a twenty year old man. At 15 we began a sexual relationship. Our relationship ended when he was 23 and I was 17.

First, I wonder if men’s attraction to pubescent and immediately post pubescent females will continue in a society that is overpopulated and no longer needs women to be so fertile as to produce as many offspring as possible to ensure the survival of the species. In furtherance to this fact, modern medicine has made it much more likely that a woman will survive labor, just as it has also made it more likely that children will survive their first few years of life. Considering these truths, wouldn’t it be in our best interests for there to be fewer children born in the next few generations then has been the norm for previous years? I do realize that such subconscious conditioning occurs over time, and our collective consciousness has not experienced so many years since this was a valid fact as to have caused this shift in perception, but I do wonder if it would be reasonable to assume we should be trying to instigate and propel said shift.

Second, I would like to examine your comment that, “I suspect that there are two separate things going on here, genes are building men to find 17 year olds to be most attractive and genes are building women to be at their peak of attractiveness at 17. It would be interesting to tease out which factor is the stronger”. I do not believe that there are two separate things going on here, but one. Beauty is not an absolute, and it changes as society does. In our society, it is most common for men to be attracted to women instead of other men, and women to be attracted to men instead of other women, so it makes sense that one gender determines exactly what qualities are attractive in the other. If men are attracted to females because of their breeding abilities, and the ability for most women to breed reaches its peak at seventeen, then the qualities of a seventeen year old are what become beautiful for that society. The biological facts of being a 17 year old woman are the same today as they ever were, it is the standard of beauty which changes. The genes of a 17 year old cannot make her more attractive if attractiveness is an ever changing collective opinion. To follow this train of thought, if society were to evolve at this point so that men were biologically attracted to older women (say because of overpopulation or something to the same effect), then the qualities of older women would become the new standard of beauty.

Lastly, I disagree with your opinion that a young person is equipped to decide for themselves if they have reached an age where they are able to deal with adult status and the sexual identity that entails. Every young person wants to grow up quickly, and the truth is that they do not have enough experience with the world to make that decision for themselves at 13 or 14 years of age. I was not ready to have the relationship I had with an older man when I was fourteen, and it has hurt me in ways that I can recognize now, but would never have been able to conceive of at that point in my development. I believed with every fiber of my being at that time that I was old enough and mature enough to handle it, but I wasn’t, and though I would have been angry at a third part interfering at that point, it would have been the best thing for me. Children need time to be children, whether they are aware of it or not, and it is our job as adults to make sure that that time is not interfered with. It is crucial for growing up at a normal rate so that children can become well adjusted adults. 21 might be a ridiculously high age limit, possibly even 18, but an age limit needs to be there for those who are not experienced or knowledgeable enough about this world to make that decision for themselves yet.

That is all. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Holly (from Canada).

Our tastes in sexual partners are not decided by fashion but by genetics. Evolution has shaped our perceptions as to what is desirable and what isn't.

Evolution is the an extremely powerful force and it can do amazing things but you have to understand how it works. It is powerful, inevitable and unavoidable but it is not the power of a bulldozer or dynamite charge, it is the power of the river. If you want to make a big hole in the ground fast dynamite and bulldozers work well. But evolution can give you the Grand Canyon.

In order for evolution to change our sexual desires men that find young women attractive would have to die young and childless, and the process would have to continue until only those who don't find young women attractive are left alive and breeding. If you understand how evolution works you will know that human evolution has all but stopped, and for good reason. Evolution requires lots of failure, lots of death, lots of dying without issue. Failure is the engine of evolution. The struggle for existence. These days existence isn't that much of a struggle and so we don't get a lot of evolution, and that is something to be glad about. These days life isn't a ruthless struggle, it's a ruthful paradise. (Whatever ruth is)

We are stuck with what evolution has given us. That includes a desire to eat sweet, salty and fatty foods whenever we get the opportunity and the desire to hook up with smart fresh-faced, even-featured girls as soon they grow noticeable breasts. Those desires will not be going away, we will have to learn to live with them.

Fashion may say that a particular look is in. But fashion is run by bitter and twisted old women and gay men who think each others' opinions valuable. Men don't give a stuff. Men know what they like. The look that will never go out of date is the narrow waist widening above and below with hips and bust. And everything in proportion. And symmetrical. The look that will never be in is saggy uneven lumpy breasts and wrinkles. Nipples pointing more than 20 degrees below the horizontal will never be regarded as desirable.

The changing of fashions does not have any major influence, it does not feed into a self-reinforcing positive feedback loop because most women have children and those considered the most attractive don't have more children than average. A woman who is successful and seen as being especially good looking is likely to attract an older and richer man and have between zero and three children, probably in her late thirties. The thirteenth most attractive girl in the class of fifteen is likely to marry earlier (while she may take longer to start having sex she is almost certainly going to go to the marriage stage much more quickly, grab it while it's on offer) to a poorer man and have more children, earlier. Evolution will favour the propagation of the genes carried by the less attractive woman. While she may not have a lot more children as they will likely be having children themselves earlier it is likely that 100 years later the less attractive woman would have more living descendants than the beauty. In the good old days the uglier women would have found themselves stuck with the men who couldn't hunt or had no land to work but these days it is almost impossible to manage not to survive and breed.

What is a reasonable age to consider a child is capable of making adult decisions? I don't know. My daughter is 15 and I trust her. In six months time the law will trust her too. I would hope she has the courage and good sense to resist having sex at her age but I think she is old enough to make her own decision, even if it might not be the decision she would have wanted to make looking back.

I don't think anybody should have sex furtively, that can't be good. If you have to hide you're too young. The young should ask themselves not whether their parents would approve but would good parents approve? A six year age gap is not a problem, at age 19. I had only known my wife about ten days before I was sleeping over at her house and being treated as the honoured guest and I was six years older. I can't imagine the same response if she had been 14, or even 16.

--
Martin Willett

Atheism | Politics | Memes | Mind | Matters | Interact | Feedback | Email | Links | Search | Forum | Home
© 1999 - 2010 by Martin Willett.
mwillett.org: Debate Unlimited