Recent Visit By Roman Polanski

[chownah]

The whole discussion has been whether the girl was willing or not. her later testimony has had a lot of doubt cast on it. In addition, it was not contested as it would have been in a court.

When and where has there been "a lot of doubt cast" on the testimony?

In the logical and legal worlds, it carries infinitely more validity than any unsworn account without the possibility of a perjury charge made by a perpetrator to a newspaper. If her testimony was not true, the place to cast doubt on it is in a court of law.

Who was responsible for it NOT being contested in court?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am casting some doubt on the wisdom of drawing conclusions from this testimony since it is uncontested and only tells one side of the story. In the logical and legal worlds hyperbole is not used...things like 'infinitely more valid' are not used in the logical or legal worlds. Certainly we would no more about what happened if it had gone to trial...but it didn't. Just because it did not go to court does not mean that the courts are free to find him guilty.....if he should return (he says he definitely will not) then the trial or some other legal process would commence and perhaps more information would come out...but don't hold your breath. Most of the charges were not going to be contested in court because the mother pushed for a plea bargain and the final last charge did not go to court because Polanski skipped out. Him skipping out does not make him any more guilty of the charges nor does it make him more innocent of the charges....it does, however, make him guilty of other crimes. You seem to think that he skipped out because he was guilty...I think you may be right...but on the other hand it almost definitely means that he thought that he would be punished beyond what he would allow so he avoided the punishment....this is most assuredly true whether he is innocent or guilty. Perhaps in the perfect world of your mind all court cases end in just outcomes but out here in the real world innocent people are sometimes (way too often) punished for no valid reason...perhaps it is more just if they do find a way out.....let me be clear....I'm not saying that Polanski fits into this category...frankly I don't have enough information to know.

[MyNameIsFarang]

It's evident from reading the transcript that the girl was coached in her testimony. But that is neither here nor there.

It is enough to say the Polanski is a fuguitive from justice which is in itself a crime no matter the merit of the orignal charges. He did not come here to claim asylum, after all.

Had he been arrested and extradited we might hope that this thread would be dead by now. In my opinion, that would be a good thing.

[SiamOne]

It's evident from reading the transcript that the girl was coached in her testimony. But that is neither here nor there.

It is enough to say the Polanski is a fuguitive from justice which is in itself a crime no matter the merit of the orignal charges. He did not come here to claim asylum, after all.

Had he been arrested and extradited we might hope that this thread would be dead by now. In my opinion, that would be a good thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I got to agree with that!!

[sriracha john]

Just because it did not go to court does not mean that the courts are free to find him guilty.....

They didn't. He entered a guilty plea.

if he should return (he says he definitely will not) then the trial or some other legal process would commence and perhaps more information would come out...but don't hold your breath. 

I'm not. He's made it perfectly clear he has no intention of ever facing the sentencing phase of his guilt:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally published in The Toronto Sun, March 8, 2000

Despite a flurry of new rumours, Roman Polanski says he has no plans to try to return to the United States, which he fled 22 years ago after being convicted of "unlawful sexual intercourse" with a 13-year-old girl he was photographing.

"I don't know if it's resignation or a lack of interest or a fear of the media circus that would happen," Polanski said in a telephone interview from Paris. The rumour mills are just speculation, he says. "Every now and again they propose the notion that I am doing something about it. Then there is a new round of articles about my possible return. There's nothing!"

Most of the charges were not going to be contested in court because the mother pushed for a plea bargain and the final last charge did not go to court because Polanski skipped out.

Not exactly, although the mother did agree to his pleading guilty to spare her daughter the trauma of going to trial. He was not, however, awaiting additional charges. He had already plead guilty and was then:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally published in The Washington Post, September 20, 1977

Movie director Roman Polanski, who had pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old girl, yesterday was ordered imprisoned for a 90-day psychiatric study to help the judge decide his sentence.

It was after completing the psychiatric evaluation and just hours before he was due to face the judge for sentencing, that he fled the country.

Him skipping out does not make him any more guilty of the charges nor does it make him more innocent of the charges....it does, however, make him guilty of other crimes. You seem to think that he skipped out because he was guilty...I think you may be right...but on the other hand it almost definitely means that he thought that he would be punished beyond what he would allow so he avoided the punishment....this is most assuredly true whether he is innocent or guilty.

His guilt had already been determined by his own admission in the form of the guilty plea.

Perhaps in the perfect world of your mind all court cases end in just outcomes but out here in the real world innocent people are sometimes (way too often) punished for no valid reason...perhaps it is more just if they do find a way out.....let me be clear....I'm not saying that Polanski fits into this category...frankly I don't have enough information to know.

I (not we... ) feel the most likely reason he fled was because he feared prison time for his crime. Although the plea agreement reached with the prosecutors did not call for it, the judge had previously alluded that he was not going to accept that portion of the agreement, which is certainly his legal perogative.

I don't have any misconceptions that all court cases are perfect. I do believe that if someone self-proclaims guilt, it's difficult for others much removed from the situation to defend that person's innocence.

Curious his own defense wasn't as fervent as others here have offered for him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[SiamOne]

here we go again

nobody has said he was innocent

I have been defending him against those who screamed that he was a paedophile

the justification for this is very obvious and has been discussed

ie the definition of a paedophile

the legal definition of rape vs real rape

the maturity or otherwise of the girl

ad nauseam

[sriracha john]

here we go again

nobody has said he was innocent

I have been defending him against those who screamed that he was a paedophile

the justification for this is very obvious and has been discussed

ie  the definition of a paedophile

the legal definition of rape vs real rape

the maturity or otherwise of the girl

ad nauseam

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I realize you're fairly new to TV so perhaps you didn't realize that you aren't compelled to comment and post in a thread you've grown tired of. Usually when faced with similar situations in other threads, I simply don't bother to read the following posts...

If you re-read the previous post, clearly there was some confusion or misunderstanding as to whether or not he was innocent.

As for "screaming" he was a pedophile... had to laugh at that, so thanks for the chuckle. I wasn't aware TV had audio options, so maybe it is I that is the newbie. The justification for considering him a pedophile are multi-layered and it would seem his own words and actions are the biggest examples. Perhaps you should re-read the entire thread to see those multiple examples.

As for the maturity of the girl or lack thereof, it seems there is much evidence that she WAS, indeed, 13 years old. Is it ok for him to force her to have anal sex if she was "worldly" or otherwise experienced?

Remember now.... you don't "have" to respond to any of these comments.

[chownah]

Actually, as pedophile topics go this one has been good.....lots of good points made all around and very not much creative torture and not many executions which, I believe we owe great thanks to the mods, especially cdnvic who, it is my understanding, deleted quite a few flames, GOOD WORK CDNVIC!!!

[britmaveric]

It's obvious Mr. Polanski has a pattern of well messing w/very young girls.

1. Rape of a 13yr old

2. Flee(s) to France and next thing has a young/barely 15 Natasha Kinski on his arm.

God knows how many unreported incidents went on?

[Judge]

It's obvious Mr. Polanski has a pattern of well messing w/very young girls.

I think that we all can agree on this.

What is up in the air is whether he used force and what kind of punishment he deserved if he didn't.

[Judge]

Actually, as pedophile topics go this one has been good.....lots of good points made all around and very not much creative torture and not many executions which, I believe we owe great thanks to the mods, especially cdnvic who, it is my understanding, deleted quite a few flames, GOOD WORK CDNVIC!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is great to be able to have an intelligent, rational discussion concerning a most controversial issue without all the usual name calling, sneers and insinuations, however, I doubt if the hanging posse is very pleased.

Congratulations CDVIC indeed!

[chownah]

Polanski has admitted to the press in blunt words that he likes very young girls. I would like to consider the time he was with the 15 year old and since I don't know, I'm going to consider that where they were it would be legal for them to have consensual sex. I would guess that many here would find this to be repulsive even though it is illegal...perhaps some would say that it is immoral. My questioin is, if a man of his age did have consensual sex with a 15 year old and in a place where this is legal, then is the 15 year old harmed in some way...even if the 15 year old is a happy and willing partner who perhaps even seeks him out for companionship and sex? Even if you feel that she is too immature to make the decision to have sex with him, I still ask, if he does is he harming her in some way? and if so...what is the nature of this harm.

Edited October 18, 2005 by chownah

[Judge]

How about the young, handsome boy who is close to her age and tells your daughter that he loves her and wants a relationship but dumps her as soon as he has ravaged her in every sordid way imaginable - legally - and boasts to everyone at school about what a slut she is and what a stud he is.

Should he be drawn and quartered also, or is punishment only reserved for sad old farts who should know better?

[britmaveric]

How about the young, handsome boy who is close to her age and tells your daughter that he loves her and wants a relationship but dumps her as soon as he has ravaged her in every sordid way imaginable - legally - and boasts to everyone at school about what a slut she is and what a stud he is.

Should he be drawn and quartered also, or is punishment only reserved for sad old farts who should know better? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well I don't think thats a faire comparison.....

Two teenies shagging is far better than someone who is 3X her age. I'd say it was rather irresponsible behaviour on both teens' parts.

As for the bragging I don't condone that in any form - if I were the girl I'd be spreading what a small todger the lad had and how bad he was. If reputations are stake - its certainly a two way street.

[Judge]

if I were the girl I'd be spreading what a small todger the lad had and how bad he was.

That would show him alright!

[kayo]

Consensual or not.Coerced or not.If this was done to my daughter by a 40 year old man that KNOWS better...I'd have his balls for a necklace.No ifs or buts.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, Chuch... If that is the kind of jewellery you appreciate, then that is your right of course....

Just kidding... I said my pieces on this yesterday.

I´m guessing -from the myriad emails and pm´s I recieved since yesterday, including quotes from a certain member, and including pm I received personally from said member, that certain posts were either edited or deleted since I was last here... (or are elsewhere on the forum).

I re-iterate, that in each of my posts I have defended not the man´s actions... I know far too little of the situation to be able to defend or accuse... In fact I know as little as everyone else who has read/followed the case.

I do defend MY OPINION that his body of movie related work is genius and in my posts I attempted to differentiate.

I however, have responded to said member, personally, as he does not know me as many here do, and expect a peaceful reply, or none whatsoever.

If said member wishes to flame me, well, I do have that magic button available, and it´ll be reported, but I hope that he will see reason.

Thanks Cdnvicfor great moderating.

Fun Thread.

I´m off to bedlam now.

[Ice Maiden]

I would just like to say also great moderating Cdnvic

There was just a little confusion but I believe thats all cleared up now after a PM.

Great thread guys and girls, keep it going

[cdnvic]

Thanks everyone, but the other mods deserve some credit too. It was a group effort.

Hopefully we can deal with more discussions this way in the future. I think we all did a pretty good job of keeping things under control so thanks everyone for a reasoned, yet spirited debate.

The reason this has been so important is that if the flames and fighting are kept at bay, we can allow a much broader range of discussion here. In the past these threads got closed down quickly, or pre-emptively due to them getting out of hand. Now I think we're getting past that point and can handle more spirited issues than we could in the past.

cv

[Johpa]

Point 3.

Jack Nicholson... The incident of statutory rape for which he was charged occured in the home of Jack NIcholson, though he was not at home himself.

Regards,

The Clown of Forgiveness

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Although unable to bring a criminal case against Nicholson, it pretty much came out that both Jack and Roman were both bonking both the girl and her mother who was another real loser. Sort of like not being able to prove that The Woody was bonking his stepdaughter while still very much a minor or that Seinfeld was playing Humbert Humbert with his little Lolita prior to the age of consent and prior to her being outted in the media. Michael Jackson is just another example of the very wealthy getting away with what us poorer schmucks can only fantasize about in our darkest and lonliest moments.

By the way, I really do admire Polanskis cinematic work as I do Nicholson's entire career. I was never much a fan of The Woody and Seinfeld is simply not funny at all for me.

And of course none of you here have acces to the largest group of pedophiles in the Kingdom because you don't speak their language.

[SiamOne]

And of course none of you here have acces to the largest group of pedophiles in the Kingdom because you don't speak their language.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

would you like to explain your last remark?

or is it so off-topic and nonsensical that you had better withdraw it?

[sriracha john]

Polanski has admitted to the press in blunt words that he likes very young girls.  I would like to consider the time he was with the 15 year old and since I don't know, I'm going to consider that where they were it would be legal for them to have consensual sex.  I would guess that many here would find this to be repulsive even though it is illegal...perhaps some would say that it is immoral.  My questioin is, if a man of his age did have consensual sex with a 15 year old and in a place where this is legal, then is the 15 year old harmed in some way...even if the 15 year old is a happy and willing partner who perhaps even seeks him out for companionship and sex?  Even if you feel that she is too immature to make the decision to have sex with him, I still ask, if he does is he harming her in some way?  and if so...what is the nature of this harm.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is an extremely difficult arena of discussion. Some examples range from the perplexingly-named "Protestant Foundation for Responsible Family Development" from the Netherlands (I'd appreciate our Dutch members who are likely more familiar with this organization to voice their opinion of it) which offers up there is virtually no harm to children from sexual contact, but instead society should feel empathy towards the harm it causes to the pedophile:

"We must also mention the harm caused to people of a pedophile nature. Through all of these prejudices and misconceptions, they are condemned to a half existence of not being themselves and cannot come to terms with themselves over their own feelings. If they do try to live according to their nature, they live in fear of discovery and punishment. This sometimes leads to tragedies - and these in turn reinforce the prejudices. It is a vicious circle. You can truly call this harm."

http://www.ipce.info/library_3/files/psvg_81_en.htm

A different viewpoint is maintained by a team of New Zealand researchers who conducted an extensive study on the subject and found "higher rates of major depression, anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, substance use disorder, and suicidal behaviors."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...st_uids=8885591

A Harvard study reports similar findings with "odds of suicide attempts were 2-4 times higher among women and 4-11 times higher among men"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...2&dopt=Abstract

In reference to your specific example, however, is to raise the issue of ephebophilia, which is actually a whole different arena for discussion.

[sriracha john]

Although unable to bring a criminal case against Nicholson, it pretty much came out that both Jack and Roman were both bonking both the girl and her mother who was another real loser.

Do you have any references for this??

Michael Jackson is just another example of the very wealthy getting away with what us poorer schmucks can only fantasize about in our darkest and lonliest moments.

Hmmmm... I would HOPE that I'm not the only one who DOESN'T fantasize about sex with children at any time, EVEN during "dark and lonely moments."   

And of course none of you here have acces to the largest group of pedophiles in the Kingdom because you don't speak their language.

Huh? Not sure what you infer by that.

I don't believe I would WANT access to pedophiles whether they speak Thai, English, German, or Swahili.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[chownah]

Polanski has admitted to the press in blunt words that he likes very young girls.  I would like to consider the time he was with the 15 year old and since I don't know, I'm going to consider that where they were it would be legal for them to have consensual sex.  I would guess that many here would find this to be repulsive even though it is illegal...perhaps some would say that it is immoral.  My questioin is, if a man of his age did have consensual sex with a 15 year old and in a place where this is legal, then is the 15 year old harmed in some way...even if the 15 year old is a happy and willing partner who perhaps even seeks him out for companionship and sex?  Even if you feel that she is too immature to make the decision to have sex with him, I still ask, if he does is he harming her in some way?  and if so...what is the nature of this harm.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is an extremely difficult arena of discussion. Some examples range from the perplexingly-named "Protestant Foundation for Responsible Family Development" from the Netherlands (I'd appreciate our Dutch members who are likely more familiar with this organization to voice their opinion of it) which offers up there is virtually no harm to children from sexual contact, but instead society should feel empathy towards the harm it causes to the pedophile:

"We must also mention the harm caused to people of a pedophile nature. Through all of these prejudices and misconceptions, they are condemned to a half existence of not being themselves and cannot come to terms with themselves over their own feelings. If they do try to live according to their nature, they live in fear of discovery and punishment. This sometimes leads to tragedies - and these in turn reinforce the prejudices. It is a vicious circle. You can truly call this harm."

http://www.ipce.info/library_3/files/psvg_81_en.htm

A different viewpoint is maintained by a team of New Zealand researchers who conducted an extensive study on the subject and found "higher rates of major depression, anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, substance use disorder, and suicidal behaviors."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...st_uids=8885591

A Harvard study reports similar findings with "odds of suicide attempts were 2-4 times higher among women and 4-11 times higher among men"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...2&dopt=Abstract

In reference to your specific example, however, is to raise the issue of ephebophilia, which is actually a whole different arena for discussion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

EPHEBOPHILIA...a new word for me. I googled it and was surprised. Ephebophilia is for adults to be interested in or to have sex with adolescents....this seems to describe Polanski (by his own admission). I wish this term had come out earlier....I think that defining pedophilia as interest or sex with pre-adolescent children and ephebophilia as interest or sex with adolescent children would make a HUGE difference in people's attitudes.

I also googled "Protestant Foundation for Responsible Family Development" and found a booklet about pedophilia published by them. It is a thoughtful piece but I must warn those who have strong negative reactions to the topic of pedophilia that it will likely push your buttons hard since it describes what activities commonly perfomed by pedophiles and suggests that unless force is used they do no harm in and of themselves.....I really think that reading it might push some 'over the edge' temporarily so be cautious.....but I think its worth reading even if you disagree with it.

The two psychological studies youi gave links for were interesting. If a researcher wants to do a study of sexual child abuse to discover its negative effects, what does the researcher do? Well, they go to places where child abuse has been reported and then study the people or data involved. It is unlikely that the scenerio which I described above (a willing, experienced 15 year old) would ever be included in one of these studies because there is no harm perceived by any of the parties involved......the studies covered situations which are not typical of my scenerio in the least....but they are good studies since they do show that when children are victimized there are consequences that could continue throughout their life and it underscores how vulnerable children are and why they need to be protected.

Edited October 19, 2005 by chownah

[Judge]

As for "screaming" he was a pedophile... had to laugh at that, so thanks for the chuckle. I wasn't aware TV had audio options

I'm pretty sure that SiamOne was speaking figuratively here.

[SiamOne]

As for "screaming" he was a pedophile... had to laugh at that, so thanks for the chuckle. I wasn't aware TV had audio options

I'm pretty sure that SiamOne was speaking figuratively here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for that Judge, some people do take things literally.

As long as he had a chuckle, that is the main thing

[sriracha john]

As for "screaming" he was a pedophile... had to laugh at that, so thanks for the chuckle. I wasn't aware TV had audio options

I'm pretty sure that SiamOne was speaking figuratively here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for that Judge, some people do take things literally.

As long as he had a chuckle, that is the main thing

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You must have missed the sarcasm related to your obviously figurative remark... but that's not unexpected I suppose.

It is interesting that this is twice now that Judge has felt compelled to post for what SiamOne meant, so perhaps it's best if I just confined my future replies to him and cut out the "middle man."

But then again, it's nice to see to SiamOne has re-joined this "ad nauseum" and "bored" topic. Welcome back.

[SiamOne]

It is interesting that this is twice now that Judge has felt compelled to post for what SiamOne meant, so perhaps it's best if I just confined my future replies to him and cut out the "middle man." 

But then again, it's nice to see to SiamOne has re-joined this "ad nauseum" and "bored" topic. Welcome back.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks John. Why would it be surprising that someone agrees with me??

I have even agreed with you in the past. BTW If you think I am a him, you had better read my replies more closely.

[Gazza]

For Sale.

Rope.

About 20 ft length. Strong, able to bear a man's weight. Unused.

Branding Iron.

Cold. Never been heated up.

Two Rocks.

Hand-sized with rough finish for good gripping. Comes in box marked 'Camel Castration Kit'. Has many other uses.

Best offers for all of the above.

Thanks Mods.

[sriracha john]

Polanski has admitted to the press in blunt words that he likes very young girls.  I would like to consider the time he was with the 15 year old and since I don't know, I'm going to consider that where they were it would be legal for them to have consensual sex.  I would guess that many here would find this to be repulsive even though it is illegal...perhaps some would say that it is immoral.  My questioin is, if a man of his age did have consensual sex with a 15 year old and in a place where this is legal, then is the 15 year old harmed in some way...even if the 15 year old is a happy and willing partner who perhaps even seeks him out for companionship and sex?  Even if you feel that she is too immature to make the decision to have sex with him, I still ask, if he does is he harming her in some way?  and if so...what is the nature of this harm.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is an extremely difficult arena of discussion. Some examples range from the perplexingly-named "Protestant Foundation for Responsible Family Development" from the Netherlands (I'd appreciate our Dutch members who are likely more familiar with this organization to voice their opinion of it) which offers up there is virtually no harm to children from sexual contact, but instead society should feel empathy towards the harm it causes to the pedophile:

"We must also mention the harm caused to people of a pedophile nature. Through all of these prejudices and misconceptions, they are condemned to a half existence of not being themselves and cannot come to terms with themselves over their own feelings. If they do try to live according to their nature, they live in fear of discovery and punishment. This sometimes leads to tragedies - and these in turn reinforce the prejudices. It is a vicious circle. You can truly call this harm."

http://www.ipce.info/library_3/files/psvg_81_en.htm

A different viewpoint is maintained by a team of New Zealand researchers who conducted an extensive study on the subject and found "higher rates of major depression, anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, substance use disorder, and suicidal behaviors."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...st_uids=8885591

A Harvard study reports similar findings with "odds of suicide attempts were 2-4 times higher among women and 4-11 times higher among men"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...2&dopt=Abstract

In reference to your specific example, however, is to raise the issue of ephebophilia, which is actually a whole different arena for discussion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

EPHEBOPHILIA...a new word for me. I googled it and was surprised.

Always happy to broaden the vocabulary and knowledge base here...

Ephebophilia is for adults to be interested in or to have sex with adolescents....this seems to describe Polanski (by his own admission). I wish this term had come out earlier....I think that defining pedophilia as interest or sex with pre-adolescent children and ephebophilia as interest or sex with adolescent children would make a HUGE difference in people's attitudes.

I'm not sure I would change my opinion of Polanski. Saying he prefers "very, very young women" and the 13 (can't get any younger "teen" than thirTEEN) year old rape is more indicative of a pedophile. He reportedly was often found in the company of 12-13 year olds and from what I understand about ephebophiles is that they are more inclined to an older segment.

I also googled "Protestant Foundation for Responsible Family Development" and found a booklet about pedophilia published by them. It is a thoughtful piece but I must warn those who have strong negative reactions to the topic of pedophilia that it will likely push your buttons hard since it describes what activities commonly perfomed by pedophiles and suggests that unless force is used they do no harm in and of themselves.....I really think that reading it might push some 'over the edge' temporarily so be cautious.....but I think its worth reading even if you disagree with it.

Was the booklet you found different than the one on the first link I posted? It is indeed quite a provocative writing. Along the lines of the above pedophile vs ephebophiles discussion, one of things it does state is:

"Pedophiles are drawn to children between the ages of about eight and fifteen."

(Coincidentally, the same age frame Polanski seems to prefer.)

The two psychological studies youi gave links for were interesting. If a researcher wants to do a study of sexual child abuse to discover its negative effects, what does the researcher do? Well, they go to places where child abuse has been reported and then study the people or data involved. It is unlikely that the scenerio which I described above (a willing, experienced 15 year old) would ever be included in one of these studies because there is no harm perceived by any of the parties involved......the studies covered situations which are not typical of my scenerio in the least....but they are good studies since they do show that when children are victimized there are consequences that could continue throughout their life and it underscores how vulnerable children are and why they need to be protected.

I realize that the studies showing the damage done by abuse didn't necessarily match your specific scenario, but I'm not of aware of any empirical studies that do. With a lack of proper research into it, we're left with conjecture. My take is that it may be harmful as adolescents are often unable to totally understand the physical, emotional, and social consequences of sexual activity. Of course, the same might also be said of many of those people classified as "Adults." The potential for the type of increased difficulties described in the above-cited studies is certainly there. This very potentiality is partially why the majority of societies often make these liaisons illegal. What's your take?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[sriracha john]

It is interesting that this is twice now that Judge has felt compelled to post for what SiamOne meant, so perhaps it's best if I just confined my future replies to him and cut out the "middle man." 

But then again, it's nice to see to SiamOne has re-joined this "ad nauseum" and "bored" topic. Welcome back.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks John. Why would it be surprising that someone agrees with me??

I have even agreed with you in the past. BTW If you think I am a him, you had better read my replies more closely.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not a matter of agreeing with you. It's a matter of speaking for you, which if Judge was more familar with your posts, has certainly never been a problem.

I agree with lots of people here... but I certainly wouldn't presume to write for them.

The middle man comment in italics was indicative of not wanting to write something inanely politically-correct as middle woman.

Whether or not you are a woman really doesn't concern me, although other members have voiced their doubts, it doesn't change my responses to your posts one way or another.

Edited October 19, 2005 by sriracha john

[Judge]

What SiamOne was saying was quite clear and easy to understand already.

I was just trying to be helpful and polite and not point that out.

Edited October 19, 2005 by Judge