• @jpreston2005@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    81 year ago

    prime reproductive years

    girls enter puberty so much earlier than boys, their capable of reproduction anywhere from 10-12. When you talk about “prime reproductive years,” know that it includes girls as young as 10. So… stop using that term. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt and inferring that you actually mean girls that are on the very cusp of womanhood, like, ages 17-19, but others may not.

    Women are hot, girls are not. Some girls can appear to be older than they are, and it’s confusing when confronted with a genuinely attractive woman that is not yet 18, because we’re caught between the confusing notions of “I am attracted to this person” and “this person is not yet old enough to to be engaged with in a socially conscious manner.” It’s not wrong to find the person attractive, it IS wrong to engage with them in a manner reserved for those that are fully realized adults. For my purposes, I’m putting adulthood at around age 22-25, when your brain is pretty much fully developed.

    So with that being said, No, Jerry Seinfeld didn’t do a bad thing by thinking a 17 year old girl attractive, he DID do a bad thing by engaging with her as if she was a fully formed adult.

    • @EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -71 year ago

      When you talk about “prime reproductive years,” know that it includes girls as young as 10.

      Prime reproductive years for women is generally late teens to late 20s. I’ll keep using the term because I’m using it accurately, and it’s exactly the whole point: biologically speaking why would it be surprising that some men would find a women who is prime for reproduction attractive? It just makes perfect sense.

      it’s confusing when confronted with a genuinely attractive woman that is not yet 18,

      It’s only confusing to you because you’ve bought into the puritanical notion that there is something wrong with being attracted to young women; there’s really nothing confusing about it: it’s reasonable to find them physically attractive, but almost certainly inappropriate to engage in a relationship with them. This is the misconception I’m trying to dispell here.

      I agree that at best he did a questionable thing. However I know nothing of her maturity at the time. As I’ve said elsewhere, I’ve met emotionally and intellectually immature 40 year olds (certainly plenty in their late 20s) and intellectually stimulating and mature 16 year olds. If it’s legal, and she was mature, why would it be wrong? And would it be wrong if I had sex with “a fully formed adult” when she is emotionally immature? I get we need a rule to catch the vast majority of the cases, but from a moral stand point I can’t say why it would be okay to have sex with an emotional immature adult, but not okay to have sex with an emotionally mature adult just because the latter is younger than the former.

      Again, don’t get me wrong, the vast majority of the time there is some taking advantage going on, and there should be laws to stop it. I’m not arguing against this.

        • @EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -6
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          girls under the age of 15 are five times more likely to die in pregnancy than women in their 20s

          I put prime years at late teens to late 20s. This seems to confirm that, not contradict it.

          The second link I cant see if or where they broke it out by age…only teen vs non-teen. I would be curious to see what would change if you moved the number to 17.

      • @jpreston2005@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        91 year ago

        If it’s legal, and she was mature, why would it be wrong

        Well a thing being legal does not make a thing right. Emotional maturity is subjective, and thus is not what we use for determining whether a person is considered an adult or not.

        would it be wrong if I had sex with “a fully formed adult” when she is emotionally immature?

        Maturity isn’t the guiding rod by which we can determine adulthood. I’m suggesting that age is relevant to this, because it’s the best we have at determining brain formation. Intellectual disabilities in an adult would mean that engaging with them sexually is wrong, showing that it is the functionality of the brain that determines adulthood. If there was never a need for a draft, I think we would naturally have concluded adulthood starts around 22-25, instead of the arbitrary designation of 18. For the purpose of having a hard rule to stop children from being taken advantage of, age is the best we have (for people without intellectual/developmental disabilities).

        With that in mind, we really can say definitively, that no, Seinfeld isn’t wrong for finding her attractive, but he was for having a sexual relationship with her.

        That being said, arguing that the urges behind the wrong act are “natural,” seems to argue for a relaxation of our attitude towards these relationships, which is also wrong. which is why other Lemmineers got the “ick” from your previous comment.

        Because nobody is upset that he found her attractive. We’re upset because he was a fully formed adult, with super-stardom and all the trappings of power that come with it, engaging in a sexual relationship with a not fully formed adult.

        • @EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          Because nobody is upset that he found her attractive.

          You should absolutely read the rest of this thread because someone outright said that I deviate from the norm by finding some of them attractive, and even tried to equate being attracted to them to having the desire to murder.

          But that being said, as I already very clearly and explicitly said, I agree laws should be in place to protect minors from predators. I’m also fine with it being based on age.

          It’s just that you are, on one hand, saying legality and morality are not the same (correctly, imo) but then arguing with me that it’s morally bad in many cases so we need to have a clear law (which I also agree with), which makes what he did immoral. Maybe they were emotionally and intellectually compatible. I don’t know, as I don’t know either of them, and everyone close to it has said it was a good relationship. Who am I to say it was bad?