JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,520
- 2,165
- Banned
- #61
Folks, don't dish what you can't take.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have posted it several times over the years, but will be glad to post it again:
Child sexual abuse: What parents should know
If you would like more...Google "1 in 4 girls sexually abused before 18" A great deal more links will pop up.
Two issues with the study, in opposite directions: The caveat in there that they probably underreport due to people not coming forward, and overreport due to differences in the definition of what sexual abuse is makes the whole thing pretty much moot.
Translation: "it's girls...who cares?"
Two issues with the study, in opposite directions: The caveat in there that they probably underreport due to people not coming forward, and overreport due to differences in the definition of what sexual abuse is makes the whole thing pretty much moot.
Translation: "it's girls...who cares?"
Nice putting words in my mouth, but no.
Neg for being a lying ass.
I have posted it several times over the years, but will be glad to post it again:
Child sexual abuse: What parents should know
If you would like more...Google "1 in 4 girls sexually abused before 18" A great deal more links will pop up.
Two issues with the study, in opposite directions: The caveat in there that they probably underreport due to people not coming forward, and overreport due to differences in the definition of what sexual abuse is makes the whole thing pretty much moot.
Oh, that makes sense. Because I was 11, so my mom said since I was old enough to know better, it was an 'affair.'
Two issues with the study, in opposite directions: The caveat in there that they probably underreport due to people not coming forward, and overreport due to differences in the definition of what sexual abuse is makes the whole thing pretty much moot.
Translation: "it's girls...who cares?"
Are 13 year old homosexual girls suffering an increase in HIV infection because of their much older homosexual partners?
No?
Are 13 year old girls lobbying to reduce the age of consent?
No?
Then it's not pertinent to THIS thread.
But it is important..which is why I will fully support and participate in a thread about that topic when you start it.
Translation: "it's girls...who cares?"
Nice putting words in my mouth, but no.
Neg for being a lying ass.
Yes...QUITE TOUCHY. But you are not the first, nor will you be the last to dismiss the very high statistics on girls suffering sexual abuse. It doesn't play like "gays and boys" with the RW crowd.
Two issues with the study, in opposite directions: The caveat in there that they probably underreport due to people not coming forward, and overreport due to differences in the definition of what sexual abuse is makes the whole thing pretty much moot.
Oh, that makes sense. Because I was 11, so my mom said since I was old enough to know better, it was an 'affair.'
No, its because if the girl was 13 and the boy was 15, since they both can't consent it would be considered "abuse" under some definitions. My issue is soley of throwing numbers around like "1 in 4" girls are abused and "1 in 6" boys are abused when the study itself says it can be way fucking off. If you are going to use numbers, they have to be solid numbers.
Translation: "it's girls...who cares?"
Are 13 year old homosexual girls suffering an increase in HIV infection because of their much older homosexual partners?
No?
Are 13 year old girls lobbying to reduce the age of consent?
No?
Then it's not pertinent to THIS thread.
But it is important..which is why I will fully support and participate in a thread about that topic when you start it.
It is as pertinent to this thread as making this about homosexuals.
But...then again, I will say......girls being sexually abused doesn't sell to the RW crowd like "gays and boys" does.
Two issues with the study, in opposite directions: The caveat in there that they probably underreport due to people not coming forward, and overreport due to differences in the definition of what sexual abuse is makes the whole thing pretty much moot.
Oh, that makes sense. Because I was 11, so my mom said since I was old enough to know better, it was an 'affair.'
No, its because if the girl was 13 and the boy was 15, since they both can't consent it would be considered "abuse" under some definitions. My issue is soley of throwing numbers around like "1 in 4" girls are abused and "1 in 6" boys are abused when the study itself says it can be way fucking off. If you are going to use numbers, they have to be solid numbers.
Folks, don't dish what you can't take.
Oh, that makes sense. Because I was 11, so my mom said since I was old enough to know better, it was an 'affair.'
No, its because if the girl was 13 and the boy was 15, since they both can't consent it would be considered "abuse" under some definitions. My issue is soley of throwing numbers around like "1 in 4" girls are abused and "1 in 6" boys are abused when the study itself says it can be way fucking off. If you are going to use numbers, they have to be solid numbers.
No. The one-in-four figure is about molestation. NOT peers. It's about power, and control, and a child who doesn't even grasp that saying no is an option.
Oh, that makes sense. Because I was 11, so my mom said since I was old enough to know better, it was an 'affair.'
No, its because if the girl was 13 and the boy was 15, since they both can't consent it would be considered "abuse" under some definitions. My issue is soley of throwing numbers around like "1 in 4" girls are abused and "1 in 6" boys are abused when the study itself says it can be way fucking off. If you are going to use numbers, they have to be solid numbers.
Then look at any of the several links you will have seen with the google phrase I suggested. I gave you one....you don't want to think about it being that many....so google some more.
Or better yet....google some study that refutes those numbers.
No, its because if the girl was 13 and the boy was 15, since they both can't consent it would be considered "abuse" under some definitions. My issue is soley of throwing numbers around like "1 in 4" girls are abused and "1 in 6" boys are abused when the study itself says it can be way fucking off. If you are going to use numbers, they have to be solid numbers.
No. The one-in-four figure is about molestation. NOT peers. It's about power, and control, and a child who doesn't even grasp that saying no is an option.
No, it was about abuse, which according to the study could also include two underage people canoodling around because neither can give consent.
Read the link.