Contact with infants

[msykm99]

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying but I don't want to spend much more time posting.

It just boils down to what type of contact we’re referring to. I don’t want to get too explicit, but I will say that not all contact is bad. Penetration is my only concern.

[Nopi B.]

wrong post, made with the other acc

[Nopi Balki]

Is difficult of course when you can't understand it and haven't found a way to understand simply. But no wonder that is why people attracted to adults find difficult to understand why some are attracted to preteens or teens. So no better person than someone with attraction to infants who understands it better to explain that.

When we hug someone they can feel we love them, words make it even clearer but they are just supplementary, some people prefer words to understand others which may be due low emotional understanding or not sufficient connection with the person in question but others are able too.

And this is the case for well parents with infants and many nepis, including myself as (some parents or nepis might have more or less connection than others).

So does the way each person communicates determines the importance of the meaning? I don't think so, each person does according to their abilities whether they are adults or infants, all falls on whether we can understand what they are okay with or what makes them happy including consent.

[CantChainTheSpirit]

This argument works as long as sexual contact is viewed as a potentially negative or harmful thing.

Does a toddler need to give consent to be tickled? hugged? kissed on the head by a family member? have raspberry's blown on their belly? be given greens to eat (yuck)? be taken to aunt Ethels house, the lady with the big mole on her chin that makes the little one ill? go to church to learn about an agry but loving god that demands personal sacrifice? No, because while these all either encroach on personal space or deeply impact the psychology of a child they're considered to have enough positive overall to not need consent. I used to hate being tickled but it would still happen and I did everything I could to get out of going to church, I used to smuggle my greens to my dog, I didn't like a lot of these things but they didnt' traumatise me, and I had a happy childhood overall.

Does a toddler need to give consent to be kissed on the lips? touched on their genitals? orally stimulated? yes. But why? I mean all of these things give pleasure, they're things adults enjoy, they don't cause physical harm, they're things that will have her/him giggling and laughing and often wanting more. Do you remember the time you were tickled as an infant or the time you were kissed by smelly aunt Ethel as an infant? I doubt it, you were too young and maybe you were sexually touched in some ways and don't remember that either, but you remember being happy and safe.

Actually, sexual contact when older is more impactful because you remember that and by then it has been given much more prominence, you've been told repeatedly about how sex is bad, about molestors roaming the streets looking for kids to snatch and rape, you've had sex painted as a nightmare scene by then. That leads to confusion for sure because on the one hand it is described as the most terrible act imaginable but on the other hand you're horny and your body wants contact. But as an infant you have been moulded through child psychological horror from those with "your best interests at heart" so you're still free to just enjoy something that feels good and causes no harm.

Of course I'm talking here abotu non-harmful contact, not penetration. Obviously that would be harmful but there needs to be a distinction for that. It's like a kiss on the head is fine but painful love bites is not. Any thinking person should be able to understand the distinction.

[johnnydoe12345]

This argument works as long as sexual contact is viewed as a potentially negative or harmful thing.

Does a toddler need to give consent to be tickled? hugged? kissed on the head by a family member? have raspberry's blown on their belly? be given greens to eat (yuck)? be taken to aunt Ethels house, the lady with the big mole on her chin that makes the little one ill? go to church to learn about an agry but loving god that demands personal sacrifice? No, because while these all either encroach on personal space or deeply impact the psychology of a child they're considered to have enough positive overall to not need consent. I used to hate being tickled but it would still happen and I did everything I could to get out of going to church, I used to smuggle my greens to my dog, I didn't like a lot of these things but they didnt' traumatise me, and I had a happy childhood overall.

Does a toddler need to give consent to be kissed on the lips? touched on their genitals? orally stimulated? yes. But why? I mean all of these things give pleasure, they're things adults enjoy, they don't cause physical harm, they're things that will have her/him giggling and laughing and often wanting more. Do you remember the time you were tickled as an infant or the time you were kissed by smelly aunt Ethel as an infant? I doubt it, you were too young and maybe you were sexually touched in some ways and don't remember that either, but you remember being happy and safe.

Actually, sexual contact when older is more impactful because you remember that and by then it has been given much more prominence, you've been told repeatedly about how sex is bad, about molestors roaming the streets looking for kids to snatch and rape, you've had sex painted as a nightmare scene by then. That leads to confusion for sure because on the one hand it is described as the most terrible act imaginable but on the other hand you're horny and your body wants contact. But as an infant you have been moulded through child psychological horror from those with "your best interests at heart" so you're still free to just enjoy something that feels good and causes no harm.

Of course I'm talking here abotu non-harmful contact, not penetration. Obviously that would be harmful but there needs to be a distinction for that. It's like a kiss on the head is fine but painful love bites is not. Any thinking person should be able to understand the distinction.

Penetration does not mean a penis inserted. It could just be a finger, and there is lube available. Why draw the line at penetration? That's just silly.

[reptanim]

I will mirror what others in this thread have said: non-harmful, non-invasive and gentle sexual contact with infants/toddlers should never really be seen as a bad thing-the gentle caress of a hand or mouth on a child's body and genitalia, done in a caring, loving way, can be positive for them. Anyone who's ever seen a toddler manually stimulating themselves can attest to this, as the pleasure they are giving themselves is very obvious. But, signs of the infant/toddler not enjoying it MUST be monitored for at all times, and all activity MUST stop if those are identified. And the focus should always be on their pleasure, and not your own, as it should always be for any sexual contact with a child.

[Mod note - this comment should be taken as a philosophical statement, not an endorsement of sex with anyone below the age of consent. We do not advise engaging in any criminalized activity.]

[DANAT4T]

I will mirror what others in this thread have said: non-harmful, non-invasive and gentle sexual contact with infants/toddlers should never really be seen as a bad thing-the gentle caress of a hand or mouth on a child's body and genitalia, done in a caring, loving way, can be positive for them. Anyone who's ever seen a toddler manually stimulating themselves can attest to this, as the pleasure they are giving themselves is very obvious. But, signs of the infant/toddler not enjoying it MUST be monitored for at all times, and all activity MUST stop if those are identified. And the focus should always be on their pleasure, and not your own, as it should always be for any sexual contact with a child.

[Mod note - this comment should be taken as a philosophical statement, not an endorsement of sex with anyone below the age of consent. We do not advise engaging in any criminalized activity.]

Interesting.

[Zmap]

I will mirror what others in this thread have said: non-harmful, non-invasive and gentle sexual contact with infants/toddlers should never really be seen as a bad thing-the gentle caress of a hand or mouth on a child's body and genitalia, done in a caring, loving way, can be positive for them. Anyone who's ever seen a toddler manually stimulating themselves can attest to this, as the pleasure they are giving themselves is very obvious. But, signs of the infant/toddler not enjoying it MUST be monitored for at all times, and all activity MUST stop if those are identified. And the focus should always be on their pleasure, and not your own, as it should always be for any sexual contact with a child.

[Mod note - this comment should be taken as a philosophical statement, not an endorsement of sex with anyone below the age of consent. We do not advise engaging in any criminalized activity.]

I very firmly agree with this stance. Any parent or really anyone that's been around 2-5 year olds know that they stimulate themselves and think nothing of it as well as at times attempt to involve others as you can see in news reports about preschool bathrooms. They are stopped from doing it rather than allowing them to continue and enjoy their life and body. Life is hard enough and something like this could very well be healthy and safe pleasure should never be block. Anything out of external contact and oral I'd not consider safe and can severely mess up the kid physically and mentally

As mod states, this is a philosophical statement and opinion from a pro C MAP

[Theendoftheline]

I will mirror what others in this thread have said: non-harmful, non-invasive and gentle sexual contact with infants/toddlers should never really be seen as a bad thing-the gentle caress of a hand or mouth on a child's body and genitalia, done in a caring, loving way, can be positive for them. Anyone who's ever seen a toddler manually stimulating themselves can attest to this, as the pleasure they are giving themselves is very obvious. But, signs of the infant/toddler not enjoying it MUST be monitored for at all times, and all activity MUST stop if those are identified. And the focus should always be on their pleasure, and not your own, as it should always be for any sexual contact with a child.

[Mod note - this comment should be taken as a philosophical statement, not an endorsement of sex with anyone below the age of consent. We do not advise engaging in any criminalized activity.]

I very firmly agree with this stance. Any parent or really anyone that's been around 2-5 year olds know that they stimulate themselves and think nothing of it as well as at times attempt to involve others as you can see in news reports about preschool bathrooms. They are stopped from doing it rather than allowing them to continue and enjoy their life and body. Life is hard enough and something like this could very well be healthy and safe pleasure should never be block. Anything out of external contact and oral I'd not consider safe and can severely mess up the kid physically and mentally

As mod states, this is a philosophical statement and opinion from a pro C MAP

Yup, their is this deep disgust reaction most people have to anything at all sex related with people under a certain age, lately that age being a hard 18 plus. And unrelated a lot of that disgust even extends to people that are 18 or older but dare to do anything sexual with someone that has a "problematic" age gap. You can give a back message, or other types of "innocent" touch for the most part and depending on the context it may either be side eyed slightly or accepted but as soon as you touch a humans genitals for the purpose of making them feel good especially under a certain age its "sick". Really its not different than any other kind of touch its just as a society we have learned that certain body parts are "disgusting and to never be touched by another person" when under some arbitrary age, even though its just at the end of the day a biological function of the human body to make you feel good when those certain parts are touched. If you really really think about it its so odd how we devolved into that line of thinking at all.