Can a fucking baby give consent?
© 27 July 2016 Marthijn Uittenbogaard
Recently I read an article [1] on the website holocaust21 about a guy from Singapore who was in favor of the abolishment of the age of consent laws concerning sexual relationships and pornography. This persons name is Amos Yee on Youtube and Amos Yee Kuan Yew on Twitter. I will use the short version Amos Yee. The guy is seventeen years old and is notorious already because he criticized Islam and therefor was in jail for a couple of weeks. I will not discuss this case in detail. Of course I'm in favor of free speech so I'm against his court case. On 11 July 2016 Amos Yee, who already has legal trouble, made a video [2] about the age of consent. I really liked that video. What I liked were several aspects of the video. The enthusiasm of Amos Yee, how he dared to discuss this topic without fear, wow. Also his language I liked, he spoke very clear and well... sort off upper class mixed with a lot of words like 'fuck you' and 'fascism' too. He was talking about the minimum and maximum prison penalties in the USA and asked: 'Are you angered yet?' I myself am very angry with the harsh and inhumane penalties in the USA and I always wonder why so little people speak out or shout it out. So I like him. Would I suck him? Yes why not? Would that be illegal, only if we film it... But let's not get off topic.
A few days later Amos posted another Youtube video [3] where he was in discussion for more than three hours with at least nine other guys. All those people had a different opinion than Amos about the sex laws and the idea of consent. So it wasn't a balanced discussion, but Yee could handle it: he is not a shy, silent guy. Amos Yee can really argue, he can think logically, think out of the box and most other speakers were not a match for him, only some. But I think Yee still made some mistakes in his reasoning. I will address these here.
In his first video Yee stated that when a child consented to sex with an adult, even penetration, then if the child regrets that decision afterwards it's the child's own fault or the parents fault for bad parenting. But I see consent as an ongoing process. If I consent to being fucked in the ass then the fucker can start fucking me, but when it hurts me and I don't like it anymore I can say: 'Stop, I did not know it would hurt', or something like that. If the fucker would continue then it's not consent anymore. Another thing is the following. Let's say a child likes to play in a sandpit. The parents allow this. No problem you would say. But now the sand is full of bad chemicals, very poisonous stuff. You inform the child: 'It's very dangerous, you will get sick and die within weeks'. The child, let's say two years old: 'But I want to play in the sandpit', and starts playing. I say, and most of you would, the parents are wrong and criminal to let the child play in such poisonous sand. So the child could not make a good informed decision. You need an age of consent for dangerous stuff.
I myself am in favor of the abolishment of the age of consent in our sex laws. The reason for this is that sex itself is not harmful. Well, there are exceptions to this rule: think about HIV, about some S&M stuff. For those you will need an age of consent. One that is always arbitrary and usually set to high. But for all the non dangerous sex an age of consent is only bad for the freedom of adults and the children too. One of the persons Amos was in discussion with said that sex by a child with a grown up would mentally damage the child and that there exists a lot of scientific proof for this statement. I always think how can someone even believe this would be true. A ten year old being sucked by a grown up. The ten year old likes it but he will be mentally damaged later. What the fuck. There is absolutely no scientific proof for this statement of mental harm. Of course not. They used to say that masturbation was harmful, and yes it was. Lots of people felt bad for doing it, ashamed, and people did even suicide attempts for it. But was the masturbation harmful or the way society was dealing with the issue? But now in 2016 most people think that if the child masturbates it's not harmful but when he let's it be done by an adult's hand: panic, criminal, sick, prison, therapy.
And even children or youths below eighteen who have sex with each other or who send sexy pictures of themselves are criminalized usually with life long terrible consequences. I call it fascism. If people want to know more about scientific research on harmfulness see for instance the Rind, Bauserman & Tromovitch research. They did research all the available data concerning this issue.
I also like to give you a quote [4] from Bill Andriette who used to write in the Nambla Bulletin. He once wrote: '[I]f children cannot consent to any activity with adults (given adults' greater power and experience) then there is no difference between consent and coercion when it comes to child-adult interaction of any kind. That would mean every trip with a child is akin to kidnapping, every conversation a barked order, every hug compelled. And this we know is not true.'
Most people say children cannot consent because their brains are not fully developed yet. But they can consent to play a Pokémon game, and do many, many other things too. It's the sex they are not allowed to. Or driving cars or drinking alcohol. Cars are dangerous and alcohol is too. Sex does not belong in this list of harmful things. Of course, like I said, except some exceptions. Why can you not enjoy being masturbated when you are a preteen child? If the man or woman who does it you really like, maybe love, and you both enjoy the touching, the loving. Then why should your brains be like Einstein's brains? If you like something, it's not harmful. Only if society acts as if it's dangerous you can be influenced negatively. See the masturbation example I made earlier.
But we can wait until the children have become old enough (16 or 18) or let the children experience with children their own age. Yes, but why should we? And by doing so we have to lock people up (for years or decades), we have to lock kids up, we have to be afraid of all grown ups, especially men, we cannot express our true love when we fall in love. We are deciding for the minors how to behave sexually, well we limit them in their choices and possible relations very drastically. And how can a grown up man and a child be close together if one bad tough would ruin his or her life? No in such a climate we must control and observe every minute of the lives of all the minors in the world. It's ruining our society.
Grown ups killed Jews, killed non-Muslims, killed homosexuals, killed 'witches'. They did this because they were informed. Informed killings. Kids, are not indoctrinated so much as grown ups concerning a lot of issues. They have less knowledge, but usually they can look more independent to an issue. We both can learn very much from each other. But acting as if minors cannot consent and make informed decisions about sexuality is totally insane. Maybe they can decide much better than the average grown up. I believe that is the case. Investigate the sex laws in the USA and in how we deal with sexuality. Most grown ups get more stressed by seeing naked tits instead off seeing violence on television.
And now child pornography. Is that a problem? Also this depends on the taboo in a society. Children can play in 'normal' Hollywood-movies. We have no problem with child actors. We also have no problem with kids in advertisements. A kid in a McDonald's ad: no problem. But later the kid can become a vegetarian. Would he or she then afterwards be mentally harmed? I don't think so. Because society is not condemning it. Would the kid be harmed if it was a vegetarian already and forced to do the advertisement by its parents. Yes, that's harmful.
On Twitter Amos Yee tweeted 'I changed my view on that, I'm instead petitioning reducing the age of consent to 13' [5]. I don't know why he changed his mind. Maybe due to how many people reacted angry? Or maybe he changed his mind because of new arguments he did not consider before. I think it's the first. But I don't know. But wanting to lower the age of consent to 13 is still seen as a radical view in our society. Hopefully the existing sex laws will be looked upon as radical in the near future. Peace.
Update: His '13' is more a strategic choice. While writing this article I listened to a live stream between Amos and some other guy [6] where he just explained his viewpoints. But let's not pin him down on it whatever his exact view is. If he needs help I hope I can help him because his honest opinions can hurt and depress him in the end. Society does not like freedom of speech very much. It never did. Amos, don't lose your head and try to not let them get you down.
notes
[1] Amos Yee: Why Child Pornography Should Be Legal, holocaust21.wordpress.com/2016/07/22/amos-yee-why-child-pornography-should-be-legal/, 22 July 2016
Transcript I - Marthijn Uittenbogaard - made of his video: www.brongersma.info/Why_child_pornography_should_be_legal
[2] Why Child Pornography Should be Legal, www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGAU1ap1scc, 11 July 2016
[3] Child Porn Debate, www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJcvk0mIdG8, 16 July 2016
[4] Consent and playing with marbles, by Bill Andriette, www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/consent_and_playing_with_marbles.htm, IPCE Newsletter (their source unknown), Number E 3; September 1998
[5] witter.com/amosyee/status/758237888022667264, Twitter, 27 July 2016
[6] Named @uzalogic on Twitter
Does the above text accidentally contain a typing, spelling, grammatical or factual error?A few days later Amos posted another Youtube video [3] where he was in discussion for more than three hours with at least nine other guys. All those people had a different opinion than Amos about the sex laws and the idea of consent. So it wasn't a balanced discussion, but Yee could handle it: he is not a shy, silent guy. Amos Yee can really argue, he can think logically, think out of the box and most other speakers were not a match for him, only some. But I think Yee still made some mistakes in his reasoning. I will address these here.
In his first video Yee stated that when a child consented to sex with an adult, even penetration, then if the child regrets that decision afterwards it's the child's own fault or the parents fault for bad parenting. But I see consent as an ongoing process. If I consent to being fucked in the ass then the fucker can start fucking me, but when it hurts me and I don't like it anymore I can say: 'Stop, I did not know it would hurt', or something like that. If the fucker would continue then it's not consent anymore. Another thing is the following. Let's say a child likes to play in a sandpit. The parents allow this. No problem you would say. But now the sand is full of bad chemicals, very poisonous stuff. You inform the child: 'It's very dangerous, you will get sick and die within weeks'. The child, let's say two years old: 'But I want to play in the sandpit', and starts playing. I say, and most of you would, the parents are wrong and criminal to let the child play in such poisonous sand. So the child could not make a good informed decision. You need an age of consent for dangerous stuff.
I myself am in favor of the abolishment of the age of consent in our sex laws. The reason for this is that sex itself is not harmful. Well, there are exceptions to this rule: think about HIV, about some S&M stuff. For those you will need an age of consent. One that is always arbitrary and usually set to high. But for all the non dangerous sex an age of consent is only bad for the freedom of adults and the children too. One of the persons Amos was in discussion with said that sex by a child with a grown up would mentally damage the child and that there exists a lot of scientific proof for this statement. I always think how can someone even believe this would be true. A ten year old being sucked by a grown up. The ten year old likes it but he will be mentally damaged later. What the fuck. There is absolutely no scientific proof for this statement of mental harm. Of course not. They used to say that masturbation was harmful, and yes it was. Lots of people felt bad for doing it, ashamed, and people did even suicide attempts for it. But was the masturbation harmful or the way society was dealing with the issue? But now in 2016 most people think that if the child masturbates it's not harmful but when he let's it be done by an adult's hand: panic, criminal, sick, prison, therapy.
And even children or youths below eighteen who have sex with each other or who send sexy pictures of themselves are criminalized usually with life long terrible consequences. I call it fascism. If people want to know more about scientific research on harmfulness see for instance the Rind, Bauserman & Tromovitch research. They did research all the available data concerning this issue.
I also like to give you a quote [4] from Bill Andriette who used to write in the Nambla Bulletin. He once wrote: '[I]f children cannot consent to any activity with adults (given adults' greater power and experience) then there is no difference between consent and coercion when it comes to child-adult interaction of any kind. That would mean every trip with a child is akin to kidnapping, every conversation a barked order, every hug compelled. And this we know is not true.'
Most people say children cannot consent because their brains are not fully developed yet. But they can consent to play a Pokémon game, and do many, many other things too. It's the sex they are not allowed to. Or driving cars or drinking alcohol. Cars are dangerous and alcohol is too. Sex does not belong in this list of harmful things. Of course, like I said, except some exceptions. Why can you not enjoy being masturbated when you are a preteen child? If the man or woman who does it you really like, maybe love, and you both enjoy the touching, the loving. Then why should your brains be like Einstein's brains? If you like something, it's not harmful. Only if society acts as if it's dangerous you can be influenced negatively. See the masturbation example I made earlier.
But we can wait until the children have become old enough (16 or 18) or let the children experience with children their own age. Yes, but why should we? And by doing so we have to lock people up (for years or decades), we have to lock kids up, we have to be afraid of all grown ups, especially men, we cannot express our true love when we fall in love. We are deciding for the minors how to behave sexually, well we limit them in their choices and possible relations very drastically. And how can a grown up man and a child be close together if one bad tough would ruin his or her life? No in such a climate we must control and observe every minute of the lives of all the minors in the world. It's ruining our society.
Grown ups killed Jews, killed non-Muslims, killed homosexuals, killed 'witches'. They did this because they were informed. Informed killings. Kids, are not indoctrinated so much as grown ups concerning a lot of issues. They have less knowledge, but usually they can look more independent to an issue. We both can learn very much from each other. But acting as if minors cannot consent and make informed decisions about sexuality is totally insane. Maybe they can decide much better than the average grown up. I believe that is the case. Investigate the sex laws in the USA and in how we deal with sexuality. Most grown ups get more stressed by seeing naked tits instead off seeing violence on television.
And now child pornography. Is that a problem? Also this depends on the taboo in a society. Children can play in 'normal' Hollywood-movies. We have no problem with child actors. We also have no problem with kids in advertisements. A kid in a McDonald's ad: no problem. But later the kid can become a vegetarian. Would he or she then afterwards be mentally harmed? I don't think so. Because society is not condemning it. Would the kid be harmed if it was a vegetarian already and forced to do the advertisement by its parents. Yes, that's harmful.
On Twitter Amos Yee tweeted 'I changed my view on that, I'm instead petitioning reducing the age of consent to 13' [5]. I don't know why he changed his mind. Maybe due to how many people reacted angry? Or maybe he changed his mind because of new arguments he did not consider before. I think it's the first. But I don't know. But wanting to lower the age of consent to 13 is still seen as a radical view in our society. Hopefully the existing sex laws will be looked upon as radical in the near future. Peace.
Update: His '13' is more a strategic choice. While writing this article I listened to a live stream between Amos and some other guy [6] where he just explained his viewpoints. But let's not pin him down on it whatever his exact view is. If he needs help I hope I can help him because his honest opinions can hurt and depress him in the end. Society does not like freedom of speech very much. It never did. Amos, don't lose your head and try to not let them get you down.
notes
[1] Amos Yee: Why Child Pornography Should Be Legal, holocaust21.wordpress.com/2016/07/22/amos-yee-why-child-pornography-should-be-legal/, 22 July 2016
Transcript I - Marthijn Uittenbogaard - made of his video: www.brongersma.info/Why_child_pornography_should_be_legal
[2] Why Child Pornography Should be Legal, www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGAU1ap1scc, 11 July 2016
[3] Child Porn Debate, www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJcvk0mIdG8, 16 July 2016
[4] Consent and playing with marbles, by Bill Andriette, www.ipce.info/ipceweb/Library/consent_and_playing_with_marbles.htm, IPCE Newsletter (their source unknown), Number E 3; September 1998
[5] witter.com/amosyee/status/758237888022667264, Twitter, 27 July 2016
[6] Named @uzalogic on Twitter
Or do you want to react to it? Then I hope you will get in touch.
