Is this the most obvious sign of lower intelligence?

[pleasevanity]

By the law it is

sexual attraction to teenagers or whatever just sounds retarded we were all teenagers that found teenagers attractive at one point, that doesn't mean that we were "ephophibles" or whatever

it doesnt need to have a name

So ur not sadistic then?

brother i am making a moral argument how does this reflect my personal interests in the slightest? i personally am revolted by children and i like older women if that makes me less of a sadist then so be it

i have no obligation to prove myself to you

 

[Loganazim]

This is very smart.

 

[pleasevanity]

I get what you mean, but I don’t agree with the jump from “someone is more vulnerable” to “therefore the person choosing them is a predator.

By that logic, any relationship with an imbalance in experience, confidence, or life stage becomes predatory just because both people are aware of the difference.

Awareness of a difference doesn’t automatically mean the goal is to exploit it. You’re assuming intent from structure alone.

I agree there’s higher risk in age gap dynamics, but risk doesn’t equal exploitation by default.

i don't really know i feel like age relationships are unique to this sort of thing

it's more about how convincing your argument is and i don't think someone that has less experience confidence etc can make an argument that they were "groomed" like a teenager that dated an adult could

 

[Big Boss]

i don't really know i feel like age relationships are unique to this sort of thing

it's more about how convincing your argument is and i don't think someone that has less experience confidence etc can make an argument that they were "groomed" like a teenager that dated an adult could

I dont agree with that. A claim of grooming isn’t something that depends on who can argue more confidently, it depends on whether there’s actual manipulation or coercion involved.

Confidence in making an argument doesn’t determine whether exploitation happened in the first place.

If the standard is just “the older person sounds more convincing so the younger person must not have been groomed,” then we’re not really talking about evidence anymore.

 

[Big Boss]

This is very smart.

What is?

 

[Loganazim]

By the law it is

Niggas deadass be thinking like if it’s restricted by the law then it’s actually bad
Answer first: What law exactly?

 

[Loganazim]

What is?

What u wrote

 

[pleasevanity]

I dont agree with that. A claim of grooming isn’t something that depends on who can argue more confidently, it depends on whether there’s actual manipulation or coercion involved.

Confidence in making an argument doesn’t determine whether exploitation happened in the first place.

If the standard is just “the older person sounds more convincing so the younger person must not have been groomed,” then we’re not really talking about evidence anymore.

i mean, in a court of law for example if someone makes a claim it must first pass through a standard of proof

i agree that it depends on whether there is actual manipulation or coercion and by extension someone with a weaker claim tends to have a weaker case

but i don't agree that somebodies subjective perspective on a relationship is a strong enough reasoning to believe they were groomed or not, if so i think a lot of people would be claiming a lot of things and a lot of people would be affected

also i don't get your analogy i was talking about a situation where someone with less experience or confidence (like you mentioned) starts to claim that they were groomed

 

[1966Ford]

Niggas deadass be thinking like if it’s restricted by the law then it’s actually bad
Answer first: What law exactly?
View attachment 5203521

Ay my fault brah