Theory about attitudes towards intergenerational relationships, relating to gender

[PorcelainLark]

I think I've talked about this before, but I'd like to talk about it again. I feel like women are more anxious about intergenerational relationships than men, when considering a younger partner which is the same gender as them.

The classic example is that whole thing in South Park of the female teacher having sex with her student. The adult men aren't characterized as concerned with the safety of the boy, they feel like it's a good thing. (Incidentally, this might suggest the aversion to pederasty is actually rooted in homophobia, since heterosexual men don't generally have a problem with adult women having sex with boys)

In contrast, I can't think of an adult women envying a younger girl that has sex with an older male.

So, why is there seemingly a difference in attitude based on gender?

I think it may be because the changes from childhood to adolescence are more radical in the case of women than of men. I think women view girls as incomplete women to a much greater degree than men viewing boys as incomplete men. The girl is taken advantage of because she is not fully developed, and can only reach psychological maturity with the experience that comes with bodily maturity. Until she has to contend with having breasts, hips, etc. her self-understanding is incomplete. Girlhood is a waiting room for womanhood, in a way that boyhood isn't for manhood.

This is how it comes across to me. What do you guys think? I'm particularly interested to hear from women, if you do feel anxious about girls being in sexual relationships? And, if so, what do you think is the root of the anxiety?

[Bookshelf]

Not a woman, but from my own perspective, it's a bit more depressing than that.

Historically, the first age of consent laws only applied to females. Boys could do whatever and whomever they wanted, whenever they wanted. This is mainly because girls were seen more as property to be traded (for land, familial connections, etc), and virgins were significantly more valuable.

Having sex with a younger girl wasn't seen as bad because she gets traumatized or hurt; it was seen as bad because you were lowering the value of what was effectively tradable property. Age of consent laws therefore could initially be looked at as property protection laws.

People's opinions on that are obviously different today and it's not exactly how people view it (Although I would still argue a significant proportion of anti-AMSC arguments from parents are rooted in how they view children as property). Despite that, it's hard to ignore that sexism still exists, and it's only relatively recently that we're seeing some equality between men and women. Females overall are still viewed as weaker, less capable, in need of protection... and by some men, still as property. This inevitably is going to make people have a stronger opinion on young girls over young boys. The virginity or 'purity' of a young girl is still seen as more valuable than that of a boy.

[Artaxerxes II]

In contrast, I can't think of an adult women envying a younger girl that has sex with an older male.

How come? Women are certainly aren't immune to envy. It should also be noted that not even feminists will touch upon the rare instance of sapphic pedophilia. While this ignorance could be chalked up to lesbian MAPs being less common as well as the most common cases of statutory rape that get prosecuted being man-girl type of relationships, I'd argue that it's deliberate when considering how a great deal of feminist writings comes from lesbian MAPs like Simone de Beauvoir, as well as the numerous instances of feminist writings on woman-girl relationships like Eve Ensler's The Vagina Monologues and Chris Bearchell's writings for the Body Politic, archive at Newgon.

So, could women's opposition to man-girl love be generally rooted in envy? For that to be true, women would need to see both pre-pubescent and pubescent girls as competitors for men. So far, the general shaming of even legal age-gap relationships where the older partner is male is a clue on the answer. I lean towards yes, given that it both explains why women aren't so concerned with lesbian intergenerational relationships as well as woman-boy love.

https://theredarchive.com/blog/Return-o ... lity.21012
https://theredarchive.com/blog/Return-o ... ists.12873

But what about gay pedos? As we see, feminists nowadays equally hate gay pedos too, although the extent of that relative to their hatred for man-girl love is arguable. But nonetheless I would say man-girl love gets the harshest treatment compared to gay MAPs, as the latter are treated somewhat of a joke in the western media in contrast to man-girl love. Take South Park's NAMBLA episode and Family Guy's recurring character Herbert: Both are portrayed negatively, but in humorous ways. In contrast, this treatment is absent for straight girl-lovers whoa are often treated negatively in modern media, such that the dark humour treatment a la South Park for them is only present in anime what with the jokes over "lolicons".

One interesting historical factoid is how the female belly dancers of the Ottoman Empire often competed with their male and more youthful counterparts, such that it wasn't uncommon for the latter to be killed by the former out of envy over their success: https://archive.org/details/bellydanceb ... 0/mode/2up

Thus, I propose a combination of factors such as:

1. Women's envy for minors (male or female) who get more affection from men that women desire
2. General feminist disdain for male sexuality (e.g., how "toxic masculinity" shifted into an attack on general masculinity")

[PorcelainLark]

Not a woman, but from my own perspective, it's a bit more depressing than that.

Historically, the first age of consent laws only applied to females. Boys could do whatever and whomever they wanted, whenever they wanted. This is mainly because girls were seen more as property to be traded (for land, familial connections, etc), and virgins were significantly more valuable.

Having sex with a younger girl wasn't seen as bad because she gets traumatized or hurt; it was seen as bad because you were lowering the value of what was effectively tradable property. Age of consent laws therefore could initially be looked at as property protection laws.

People's opinions on that are obviously different today and it's not exactly how people view it (Although I would still argue a significant proportion of anti-AMSC arguments from parents are rooted in how they view children as property). Despite that, it's hard to ignore that sexism still exists, and it's only relatively recently that we're seeing some equality between men and women. Females overall are still viewed as weaker, less capable, in need of protection... and by some men, still as property. This inevitably is going to make people have a stronger opinion on young girls over young boys. The virginity or 'purity' of a young girl is still seen as more valuable than that of a boy.

So, would your view be that a woman that feels uncomfortable about a young girl having sex with a man has internalized misogyny?

In contrast, I can't think of an adult women envying a younger girl that has sex with an older male.

How come?

I mean no examples spring immediately to mind, not that it's unimaginable. I just don't recall seeing it.

So, could women's opposition to man-girl love be generally rooted in envy? For that to be true, women would need to see both pre-pubescent and pubescent girls as competitors for men. So far, the general shaming of even legal age-gap relationships where the older partner is male is a clue on the answer. I lean towards yes, given that it both explains why women aren't so concerned with lesbian intergenerational relationships as well as woman-boy love.

I mean, you could hate male sexuality without envying the attention. I lean towards women tending to have significantly lower libidos than men. Women's sexuality isn't therefore seen as threatening as male sexuality by women.

But what about gay pedos? As we see, feminists nowadays equally hate gay pedos too, although the extent of that relative to their hatred for man-girl love is arguable. But nonetheless I would say man-girl love gets the harshest treatment compared to gay MAPs, as the latter are treated somewhat of a joke in the western media in contrast to man-girl love.

I don't know. Camille Paglia was pretty supportive of gay MAPs. I feel like they don't personally feel threatened by pederasty, but they oppose it because of anxiety about girls being sexualized. A cynic might say they opportunistically made use of homophobia against pederasts to enforce rules based on their on anxiety (the enemy of my enemy).

Thus, I propose a combination of factors such as:

1. Women's envy for minors (male or female) who get more affection from men that women desire
2. General feminist disdain for male sexuality (e.g., how "toxic masculinity" shifted into an attack on general masculinity")

I haven't seen so much of the first, but I agree with second. I do feel like a lot of women are uncomfortable with male sexuality. I feel like the fear that older women have is more economic than sexual, i.e. if your husband or boyfriend is more interested in young girls, is he going to continue to support you? This is to say nothing of the affection and companionship which is at stake (as much as it's a stereotype, I do feel like this is usually where jealousy lies more than sexual attention).

To be clear, I'm not meaning this a polemic against women. I don't really have ill will towards women. I want to talk about this, because I don't feel we've had enough non-judgemental conversations about this subject to get a clear picture. Everyone tends to gravitate toward Redpill type thinking, feminism, or indifference. It feels like there's a real issue here, so I'd like to slow down and examine it, without immediately getting into arguments.

[Bookshelf]

So, would your view be that a woman that feels uncomfortable about a young girl having sex with a man has internalized misogyny?

I wouldn't say completely. I think one of the core issues revolving around AMSC is how children are still viewed as less-than-people; in the west they're usually treated like accessories, and some parents go as far as to make a hobby out of raising them as opposed to it being a responsibility. As I alluded to in my previous post, this means modern children are in some ways property. It might not be true anymore that there's the same historic view surrounding value, however there certainly is an argument to be made that adults disapprove of AMSC because it represents liberty and thus a lack of control.

Towards women and young girls; there is the same desire for control over youth that most parents have. Their daughter just as much as their son is an accessory piece. Something to post online for likes, or to dress up as they please. For women in particular, they are more likely to be home-makers and less likely to have full time jobs or a social life - we've created a role for women wherein they are expected to be the primary caregivers of children. So inevitably when children gain independence and less care is needed, I think a lot of them might feel unfulfilled. This leads to a desire for more control to ensure this the role they've been socialized into is more fulfilling.

As for why reactions towards young girls are worse than young boys, that is where there might be internalized misogyny when it comes from women. Girls usually have more attention in all aspects of life, on the belief that they need more protection - which I suspect is rooted in the historic view of girls being tradable property.

This might have been a mess to read so I'll try and summarize my thoughts:
- Modern children are viewed as accessories
- Parents, particularly parents that don't have social lives or aren't in full time employment, are obsessed with making parenting a hobby, causing a stronger desire for control of their children
- Girls have historically been viewed as property where their virginity contributed to their value as a person, and I just don't think society has moved entirely passed it yet

[BLueRibbon]

Not talking specifically about sexual relationships, but about interactions in general, there is a very strong tendency here for parents to worry much less about the safety of their boys than their girls. In fact, it is really not a big deal in many cases for a man to befriend a boy whose parents he doesn't know well. It would not be the same if a man befriended a girl. I see it as having two main causes:

1. Boys are not considered subjects of male sexual attraction.
2. Boys are deemed to be more capable of standing up for themselves.

[Artaxerxes II]

Not talking specifically about sexual relationships, but about interactions in general, there is a very strong tendency here for parents to worry much less about the safety of their boys than their girls. In fact, it is really not a big deal in many cases for a man to befriend a boy whose parents he doesn't know well. It would not be the same if a man befriended a girl. I see it as having two main causes:

1. Boys are not considered subjects of male sexual attraction.
2. Boys are deemed to be more capable of standing up for themselves.

You also forgot another cause: Society in general, across the world, is much less possessive of boys than it is to girls, hence why the first "statutory rape" laws that emerged in medieval England and early modern continental Europe (as well as medieval China) solely applied to heterosexual relationships where the minor involved in the coitus was female. Sodomy of boys was generally punished via anti-sodomy statutes that din't make distinctions based on age, whilst woman-boy coitus would've likely been prosecuted under some anti-adultery statute if it wasn't in wedlock, although the extent and enforcement of such laws in those time periods is debatable.