TikTok users saying that children have agency to engage in sexual acts...

[aeterna91]

A few days ago, I saw a video on TikTok whose comments caught my attention. In them, there were a lot of people saying that 8-10-year-olds know exactly what they are doing, even when it comes to engaging in sexual acts, that they are fully responsible for their actions, and that they should be treated exactly the same as adults. Some of these comments had hundreds of likes.

How is this even possible? Last time I checked, only an evil paedophile could think that way and they would be immediately banned from any social network where they dared to post something like that, right?

Well, there is an explanation. A very sad explanation: violence and the desire to punish crimes.

Apparently, a 5-year-old girl was raped, beaten, and tortured by a group of boys aged 8-10.

https://www.tiktok.com/@officialfinechi ... 6625526029

Of course, the first thing that comes to mind when hearing this news is empathy for the victim, what that poor 5-year-old girl had to suffer. How terrible the news is, and how we wish it could have been avoided. We all agree on that, of course, regardless of our opinions. That's obvious.

In this post, however, I wanted to talk about something a little less obvious that not everyone thinks the same way about. I wanted to talk about how shocked I was by the stance taken in the comments, and how hypocritical I find it. Because you can read comments in that video such as:

"My thought is if you wanna act like an adult your gonna get treated like an adult"
"8-10 is past the age for the infancy defense..they can very much be charged as adults"
"They are not “too young” if they are doing adult activities. This wasn’t an accident."
"when will yall learn that not all kids are innocent lmfao"
"kids are not just kids."
"Police said they're too young!? Too young for WHAT! Where they too young when they did what they did!?"
"Their actions deserve adult charges 100% a line needs to be drawn this can't become a thing"
"and people say these kids 'dont know what they are doing' they know, even at that age, they know."
"If you commit an adult crime, you are to be treated as an adult."
"Wanna act like an adult you get treated as an adult"

So, in this way, it's socially acceptable to say that children aged 8-10 know perfectly well what they are doing, even when it comes to engaging in sexual acts, that they are fully responsible for their actions, and that they should be treated exactly the same as adults.

Somehow, if you are 17 years old and want to have sex with someone a few years older than you, it turns out that your brain is not developed enough, you are not aware of your actions, and you cannot be held responsible for them. But if it's a matter of punishing a crime, it seems that your brain develops enough to be responsible for your actions much, much earlier. What a cruel form of hypocrisy. It feels like they just want to have power over children, which is why they are simultaneously never mature enough to have rights and freedoms but always mature enough to be imprisoned. Sadly, as gingidu said once:

People only think minors have sexual agency when they use violence.

[lovelunloved]

Someone (who likely prefers to remain anonymous) said this; Reminds me of this subject matter:

If the subject is about criminality, then the media/people call them "youths" or "adolescents". If the subject matter is about allegedly being a "victim", then the media/people call them "children".
You can't have it both ways.
Either they have agency, or they don't.

A friend of mine who is “neutral-contact” (not firmly against AMSC, but also not for) discussed this incident with me, and stated that they believe in the cases of youth behaving sexually violent, that those youth must’ve been also sexually abused, and deserving of care rather than punishment. You’d think anti’s would share this belief. I always see people hurt the very “children” they attempt to protect.
I doubt these people even realize their hypocrisy. I don’t have TikTok, but perhaps someone should bring this up to them. I am curious to see what their argument would be.

[Not Forever]

[...], and stated that they believe in the cases of youth behaving sexually violent, that those youth must’ve been also sexually abused, and deserving of care rather than punishment. You’d think anti’s would share this belief.

I believe it's hard to support, as it seems to me that group dynamics (which can lead to gang rapes) are very different from acts committed individually. Then, we would also have to ask how traumatized people, affected by the same thing, managed to form friendships, come together, and agree to release their trauma in that way.

That said, I believe there's also a fallacy, though I don't know its name, in the idea that a kid, by nature and without trauma, is essentially a good little angel.

[lovelunloved]

I believe it's hard to support, as it seems to me that group dynamics (which can lead to gang rapes) are very different from acts committed individually. Then, we would also have to ask how traumatized people, affected by the same thing, managed to form friendships, come together, and agree to release their trauma in that way.

That said, I believe there's also a fallacy, though I don't know its name, in the idea that a kid, by nature and without trauma, is essentially a good little angel.

I agree that such a common belief as this is so, so mistaken.
Children can be cruel, demonstrably and especially amongst eachother. Literally in what you just shared. A common argument I see against youth sexual autonomy IS this idea of inherent childhood innocence (which is kind of what you’re describing). This falls flat in situations like this, clearly. More hypocrisy from anti’s.

I think that my friends logic is only slightly off though, it’s difficult to imagine a scenario where *anyone*, not even necessarily minors or youth, would act so horribly without external (harmful) influences or trauma. Gladly, most people whom suffered greatly don’t go and rape 5 year olds, but that fact does not dismiss what I just stated. As well as the fact that younger children are admittedly a little more vulnerable to those influences.
Group dynamics are definitely different towards individual decision, but I struggle to see the relevance here.

[Not Forever]

would act so horribly without external (harmful) influences or trauma.

I believe that this is precisely why group dynamics are treated as something separate. I mean, a whole series of dynamics form that can lead to antisocial behaviors: from vandalism, to drug use, to rape. People encouraging each other, hierarchies based on charisma, and things like that. There’s a search for consensus, approval, and so on. I truly think they can be considered a small world unto themselves.

As for whether they are "harmful influences" or "positive influences", I think it’s simply the way society interprets them based on the context they are immersed in.

After all: Why do people tend to avoid antisocial behavior? Because of society's negative judgment. But what if society were different? Group dynamics, as I interpret them, are in fact a different society. A sub-society, with its own rules that change depending on the people that make it up.

[Curson]