Sex destroys childhood argument

[CantChainTheSpirit]

I've heard the argument that the reason that children shouldn't engage in sexual activity is that it takes away their childhood. But is this true or is the inverse true?

For this assertion to be true then it requires that a childhood is incompatible with sexual activity. That's the underlying premise, that childhood is a sexless state and sexual activity therefore breaks that state.

But children like adults do have sexual feelings. I was sexually active from a young age. When my wife and I became parents we were shocked to find our toddler was masturbating a lot but after seeking advice from other parents and medical advice we learned that it's normal and very common. Kids touch themselves because it feels good and it's natural to them.

So kids have sexual feelings. They don't have the vocabulary to talk about sex but they recognise the feelings and enjoy them.
Kids also chase older people. In school the popular girls had older boyfriends, had posters are adult stars, talked about guys they fancy and yes, masturbate with sexual fantasies of older guys. By the time they're teens it isn't uncommon for people to engage in underage sex and yes, people talk about teenage pregnancies because they really are a thing.

So the evidence is that kids are sexual, have sexual feelings and wants, it's a natural state of childhood. Therefore the premise above is flawed, sexual activity does not destroy a childhood.

What does destroy a childhood is force, abuse, fear. Kids that learn fear and learn they are powerless carry trauma forward, but that is different to sexual activity. A child can have no sexual activity and experience abuse and fear.

In fact, is the opposite true? Is suppressing sexual activity destroying a childhood? Is creating feelings of fear and guilt through denial and punishment what actually destrosy childhood? Is telling children that sex is bad and denying sexual relationships abusive, creating long term trauma and destroying childhoods? Is that why soe many people entering adulthood have hangups about sex and relationships, it's the long tail of trauma through denial?

[CantChainTheSpirit]

I've also heard the argument that the issue is that sex can't be undone. Once a child experiences it then they can't unexperience it so childhood is gone. But the same could be applied to anything experienced in childhood. Eating vegetables, once you've done it there's no undoing it, going to a dentist, learning about a God, earning some money, losing a pet for family member, a first kiss, holding hands, watching a movie or reading a book. The fact that it can't be undone isn't in my opinion an argument either way, childhood after all is about learning and experiencing.

Our attitude to sex isn't a rule of nature, it's a cultural rule. A different culture could have a very different view of sexual activity and be equally against our views as abusive and dangerous. Throughout history there could have been small changes that would ripple forward creating a very different world today. Maybe Rome never fell, Germany won, the original God of Israel El became the dominant God of today, different forms of education or different human rights. In any number of these alternative timelines, sex and sexuality could be very different. There may be no age of consent, power and decision making rests with the family and individual, sex is a natural activity between any two consenting people with childeren holding real power such as voting rights, perhaps we'd have a ruler like Tutankhamun, a child ruler.

I'm not talking about penetration or disease or harmful acts any more than I'm talking about people working or living in dangerous conditions or eating dangerous substances. Health is important to everyone at every age. What I'm referring to is whether taking away something that is natural is good or bad. I'm trying to think of something to compare it to. Like swimming, the act of swimming isn't good or bad. Yes you can drown, get ill from polluted water, but you can also learn a useful skill for the future and have fun doing it. Denying children the right to swim because of the dangers does make some sense, but I think a childhood can be more fun with swimming. I used to hate swimming as a kid but I was sexually active with an adult which I did enjoy and wasn't harmed by, it was just part of my own childhood. But there was a girl I knew at school when I was about 10 who told me that she was sexually active with someone and didn't want to be. I told her to speak to a teacher or someone else. I know sex can be abusive, it just doesn't have to be and for her she was too afraid to talk about it. It "may" be that in a different timeline where sex isn't something so taboo and hidden that she could have talked about it and find a better situation.

This is just an opinion and totally hypothetical, but I do think something is lost from childhood by removing natural things from children without even asking them, just because they make us uncomfortable or because there are some risks,

[BLueRibbon]

In fact, is the opposite true? Is suppressing sexual activity destroying a childhood? Is creating feelings of fear and guilt through denial and punishment what actually destrosy childhood? Is telling children that sex is bad and denying sexual relationships abusive, creating long term trauma and destroying childhoods? Is that why soe many people entering adulthood have hangups about sex and relationships, it's the long tail of trauma through denial?

I've also heard the argument that the issue is that sex can't be undone. Once a child experiences it then they can't unexperience it so childhood is gone. But the same could be applied to anything experienced in childhood. Eating vegetables, once you've done it there's no undoing it, going to a dentist, learning about a God, earning some money, losing a pet for family member, a first kiss, holding hands, watching a movie or reading a book. The fact that it can't be undone isn't in my opinion an argument either way, childhood after all is about learning and experiencing.

Interesting arguments.