MAP Forum

I chose #1. Even avoiding harm to myself is too nebulous a standard for making a sexual relationship impermissible. I don't feel I can reliably tell in advance. As for avoiding harm to the other person, best to leave that up to them to determine.

When it comes to relationships, according to the latest psychological paradigm (ofc they make a special exception for minor/non-minor relationships), there are but two questions to ask:

Are you happy?
Are you functional?

If the answer is yes to both, intervention is unwarranted, even if other people see it as unhealthy; intervention will do more harm than good.

Fragment wrote: ↑Thu Sep 05, 2024 8:57 am

FairBlueLove wrote: ↑Wed Sep 04, 2024 9:30 pm It's kind of funny... Choice n.2 didn't receive any vote, yet - assuming I understood it correctly - that reflects how we treat children in many accepted instances (school, religion...).

It's clear evidence that the personhood of minors is largely rejected by society.

To be honest, even outside of sex you can see the trend away from freedom and towards safety in parenting. Look at your local playground compared to a playground in the 80s for evidence.

I think part of the problem is the decline in fertility rates. When you have 1-3 kids instead of 5-8 kids you're going to be more inclined to take a "protection" mindset over a "liberation" mindset.

MAPs obviously have a vested interest, but I think more than that MAPs try to look at things through the viewpoint of minors. We want minors to have a rich range of experiences, even if there is some risk. A danger free life is basically impossible, the important thing is that the person involved WANTS to engage in a certain behavior. That's what the results so far seem to indicate.

I agree on every point.

Joanne7315 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 05, 2024 6:35 pm Many will jump in and say that Minors are unable to give informed consent to a relationship. Personally I disagree and I think they are fully capable. Minors more than adults are capable of sincere love. Physical connection is an extension of love. I believe they are capable of love.

I think "informed consent", meaning knowing the possible ramifications, is impossible even for adults, so it doesn't make sense to use it as an excuse to prohibit minors expressing their feelings freely.

For the rest, I fully agree with you. I still remember my feelings of love when I was in the elementary school, and I felt very clearly the physical attraction intertwined with those sentiments.

I remember form school as a 12 yo being completely infatuated with one of the 6th formers (17).

In terms of consent, informed consent is not necessarily required for me to engage in a sexual interaction with a minor of any age. While having informed consent is a good thing to have to prevent the potential consequences of sexual activity such a std's or pregnancy, it really depends on the mindset of the informed. As long as it is something that is mutual where the child wants to explore the sexual feelings he/she may have for the adult and the adult reciprocates those feelings and desires back, then that is fine. It is opportunity to build a stronger bond and wisdom through such a physically and emotionally pleasurable experience filled with excitement and ecstasy/euphoria, as long as the adult doesn't have the mindset of viewing the girl/boy as a horny toy to get his/her rocks off that has no regard for what may happened to that younger person in the future.

If both parties want physical activities then there shouldn't be an issue