CSA dilemma argument - Revision history

The Admins at 14:36, 15 March 2023

2023-03-15T14:36:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:36, 15 March 2023
Line 9:		Line 9:
	''3. So given what we now know about CSA statistics, your dilemma is - do you:''		''3. So given what we now know about CSA statistics, your dilemma is - do you:''

	''3a. Endorse the present, overly-inclusive definition of CSA, which after including cases where simple consent was present, becomes empirically invalid, as it can not be said to reliably predict trauma. Or...''		''3a. Endorse the present, overly-inclusive definition of CSA, which after including cases where simple [[consent]] was present, becomes empirically invalid, as it can not be said to reliably predict trauma. Or...''

	''3b. Endorse a new, carefully crafted definition in which force/coercion (lack of simple consent) forms the basis for determining abuse. Unlike 3a, this definition '''predicts some''' negative adjustment outcomes.''		''3b. Endorse a new, carefully crafted definition in which force/coercion (lack of simple consent) forms the basis for determining abuse. Unlike 3a, this definition '''predicts some''' negative adjustment outcomes.''

The Admins at 13:24, 15 March 2023

2023-03-15T13:24:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:24, 15 March 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	You can use a basic '''CSA dilemma strategy''' to shut down an adult-minor/child sex debate on the basis of informed vs simple consent and concept validity. We republish this in the form of a templated argument, but you should modify the text slightly for originality. Link a research list - primarily [[Research: Prevalence of Harm and Negative Outcomes\|outcomes]] or the [https://web.archive.org/web/20211021023155/https://cchain2021.tiiny.site/ Web Archive compo] of all 4 articles on CSA outcomes and harm causation. This, particularly [[Rind et al]], is your evidence referred to in the following argument - used to contest your opponent's idea that sex between adults and minors is intrinsically or at least generally very harmful, therefore immoral. Often your opponent will use clinical/legal type sampling in their sources - but these are far too unrepresentative. This type of selective sampling could be used to classify all sex between two adults or two people of different races as harmful if the researcher only solicited input from assault survivors or therapy referrals. Point that out (to show that you are a step ahead of them) and then cut to the dilemma:		You can use a basic '''CSA dilemma strategy''' to shut down an adult-minor/child sex debate on the basis of informed vs simple [[consent]] and concept validity. We republish this in the form of a templated argument, but you should modify the text slightly for originality. Link a research list - primarily [[Research: Prevalence of Harm and Negative Outcomes\|outcomes]] or the [https://web.archive.org/web/20211021023155/https://cchain2021.tiiny.site/ Web Archive compo] of all 4 articles on CSA outcomes and harm causation. This, particularly [[Rind et al]], is your evidence referred to in the following argument - used to contest your opponent's idea that sex between adults and minors is intrinsically or at least generally very harmful, therefore immoral. Often your opponent will use clinical/legal type sampling in their sources - but these are far too unrepresentative. This type of selective sampling could be used to classify all sex between two adults or two people of different races as harmful if the researcher only solicited input from assault survivors or therapy referrals. Point that out (to show that you are a step ahead of them) and then cut to the dilemma:

	<blockquote>''As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''		<blockquote>''As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''

The Admins at 23:05, 14 January 2023

2023-01-14T23:05:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:05, 14 January 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	You can use a basic '''CSA dilemma strategy''' to shut down an adult-minor/child sex debate on the basis of informed vs simple consent and concept validity. We republish this in the form of a templated argument, but you should modify the text slightly for originality. Link a research list - primarily [[Research: Prevalence of Harm and Negative Outcomes\|outcomes]] or the [https://web.archive.org/web/20211021023155/https://cchain2021.tiiny.site/ Web Archive compo] of all 4 articles on CSA outcomes and harm causation. This is your evidence referred to in the following argument - used to contest your opponent's idea that sex between adults and minors is intrinsically or at least generally very harmful, therefore immoral. Often your opponent will use clinical/legal type sampling in their sources - but these are far too unrepresentative. This type of selective sampling could be used to classify all sex between two adults or two people of different races as harmful if the researcher only solicited input from assault survivors or therapy referrals. Point that out (to show that you are a step ahead of them) and then cut to the dilemma:		You can use a basic '''CSA dilemma strategy''' to shut down an adult-minor/child sex debate on the basis of informed vs simple consent and concept validity. We republish this in the form of a templated argument, but you should modify the text slightly for originality. Link a research list - primarily [[Research: Prevalence of Harm and Negative Outcomes\|outcomes]] or the [https://web.archive.org/web/20211021023155/https://cchain2021.tiiny.site/ Web Archive compo] of all 4 articles on CSA outcomes and harm causation. This, particularly [[Rind et al]], is your evidence referred to in the following argument - used to contest your opponent's idea that sex between adults and minors is intrinsically or at least generally very harmful, therefore immoral. Often your opponent will use clinical/legal type sampling in their sources - but these are far too unrepresentative. This type of selective sampling could be used to classify all sex between two adults or two people of different races as harmful if the researcher only solicited input from assault survivors or therapy referrals. Point that out (to show that you are a step ahead of them) and then cut to the dilemma:

	<blockquote>''As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''		<blockquote>''As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''
Line 5:		Line 5:
	''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (by the way, women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults! See [[Media:Adultadult2.png\|Kinsey]], for example).''		''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (by the way, women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults! See [[Media:Adultadult2.png\|Kinsey]], for example).''

	''2. With respect to the more important measure of negative '''psychological adjustment''', as my sources have shown, "CSA's" relationship with this, fades to statistical insignificance once we eliminate confounds. Moreover, the absence of simple consent (i.e. '''yes please/no, stop''', not informed consent, which is an arbitrary legal category) accounts for the '''~~vast bulk~~''' of whatever negative psychological adjustment ~~outcome~~ remains ~~- something like 8~~:1. This strongly suggests that any association between willing sex and poor psychological adjustment is not only statistically insignificant, but likely to be due to confounding variables ~~such as poor family environment~~. As for forceful interactions that lack simple consent, girls in particular are more commonly victims of this - but rather interestingly, this does not account for all of their reduced psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' substantially more negative subjective recall and marginally poorer psychological adjustment is highly indicative of misogynistic societal conditioning, resulting in slightly higher levels of iatrogenic/secondary harm.''		''2. With respect to the more important measure of negative '''psychological adjustment''', as my sources have shown, "CSA's" relationship with this, fades to statistical insignificance once we eliminate confounds. Moreover, the absence of simple consent (i.e. '''yes please/no, stop''', not informed consent, which is an arbitrary legal category) accounts for the '''a large amount''' of whatever negative psychological adjustment remains. Measures such as poor family environment are significantly more powerful predictors of harm than CSA, by a factor of around 9:1 according to Rind. This strongly suggests that any association between willing sex and poor psychological adjustment is not only statistically insignificant, but likely to be due to further, unaccounted for confounding variables. As for forceful interactions that lack simple consent, girls in particular are more commonly victims of this - but rather interestingly, this does not account for all of their reduced psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' substantially more negative subjective recall and marginally poorer psychological adjustment is highly indicative of misogynistic societal conditioning, resulting in slightly higher levels of iatrogenic/secondary harm.''

	''3. So given what we now know about CSA statistics, your dilemma is - do you:''		''3. So given what we now know about CSA statistics, your dilemma is - do you:''

The Admins at 22:51, 14 January 2023

2023-01-14T22:51:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:51, 14 January 2023
Line 5:		Line 5:
	''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (by the way, women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults! See [[Media:Adultadult2.png\|Kinsey]], for example).''		''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (by the way, women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults! See [[Media:Adultadult2.png\|Kinsey]], for example).''

	''2. With respect to the more important measure of negative ''psychological adjustment'', as my sources have shown, "CSA's" relationship with this, fades to statistical insignificance once we eliminate confounds. Moreover, the absence of simple consent (i.e. '''yes please/no, stop''', not informed consent, which is an arbitrary legal category) accounts for the ''vast bulk'' of whatever negative psychological adjustment outcome remains - something like 8:1. This strongly suggests that any association between willing sex and poor psychological adjustment is not only statistically insignificant, but likely to be due to confounding variables such as poor family environment. As for forceful interactions that lack simple consent, girls in particular are more commonly victims of this - but rather interestingly, this does not account for all of their reduced psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' substantially more negative subjective recall and marginally poorer psychological adjustment is highly indicative of misogynistic societal conditioning, resulting in slightly higher levels of iatrogenic/secondary harm.''		''2. With respect to the more important measure of negative '''psychological adjustment''', as my sources have shown, "CSA's" relationship with this, fades to statistical insignificance once we eliminate confounds. Moreover, the absence of simple consent (i.e. '''yes please/no, stop''', not informed consent, which is an arbitrary legal category) accounts for the '''vast bulk''' of whatever negative psychological adjustment outcome remains - something like 8:1. This strongly suggests that any association between willing sex and poor psychological adjustment is not only statistically insignificant, but likely to be due to confounding variables such as poor family environment. As for forceful interactions that lack simple consent, girls in particular are more commonly victims of this - but rather interestingly, this does not account for all of their reduced psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' substantially more negative subjective recall and marginally poorer psychological adjustment is highly indicative of misogynistic societal conditioning, resulting in slightly higher levels of iatrogenic/secondary harm.''

	''3. So given what we now know about CSA statistics, your dilemma is - do you:''		''3. So given what we now know about CSA statistics, your dilemma is - do you:''
Line 11:		Line 11:
	''3a. Endorse the present, overly-inclusive definition of CSA, which after including cases where simple consent was present, becomes empirically invalid, as it can not be said to reliably predict trauma. Or...''		''3a. Endorse the present, overly-inclusive definition of CSA, which after including cases where simple consent was present, becomes empirically invalid, as it can not be said to reliably predict trauma. Or...''

	''3b. Endorse a new, carefully crafted definition in which force/coercion (lack of simple consent) forms the basis for determining abuse. Unlike 3a, this definition ''predicts'~~' ''some~~'' negative adjustment outcomes.''		''3b. Endorse a new, carefully crafted definition in which force/coercion (lack of simple consent) forms the basis for determining abuse. Unlike 3a, this definition '''predicts some''' negative adjustment outcomes.''

	''4. From my perspective, 3b. is the preferred option - and should be met with a change in the law in which youth aged 12 and up can pre-declare by opting in to an emancipation program, provided they meet basic competencies.''		''4. From my perspective, 3b. is the preferred option - and should be met with a change in the law in which youth aged 12 and up can pre-declare by opting in to an emancipation program, provided they meet basic competencies.''

The Admins at 22:50, 14 January 2023

2023-01-14T22:50:16Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:50, 14 January 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	You can use a basic '''CSA dilemma strategy''' to shut down an adult-minor/child sex debate on the basis of informed vs simple consent and concept validity. We republish this in the form of a templated argument, but you should modify the text slightly for originality. Link a research list - primarily [[Research: Prevalence of Harm and Negative Outcomes\|outcomes]] or the [https://web.archive.org/web/20211021023155/https://cchain2021.tiiny.site/ Web Archive compo] of all 4 articles on CSA outcomes and harm causation. This is your evidence referred to in the following argument - used to contest your opponent's idea that sex between adults and minors is intrinsically or at least generally very harmful, therefore immoral. Often your opponent will use clinical/legal type sampling in their sources - but these are far too unrepresentative. This type of selective sampling could be used to classify all sex between two adults or two people of different races as harmful if the researcher only solicited input from assault survivors or therapy referrals. Point that out (to show that you are a step ahead of them) and then cut to the dilemma:		You can use a basic '''CSA dilemma strategy''' to shut down an adult-minor/child sex debate on the basis of informed vs simple consent and concept validity. We republish this in the form of a templated argument, but you should modify the text slightly for originality. Link a research list - primarily [[Research: Prevalence of Harm and Negative Outcomes\|outcomes]] or the [https://web.archive.org/web/20211021023155/https://cchain2021.tiiny.site/ Web Archive compo] of all 4 articles on CSA outcomes and harm causation. This is your evidence referred to in the following argument - used to contest your opponent's idea that sex between adults and minors is intrinsically or at least generally very harmful, therefore immoral. Often your opponent will use clinical/legal type sampling in their sources - but these are far too unrepresentative. This type of selective sampling could be used to classify all sex between two adults or two people of different races as harmful if the researcher only solicited input from assault survivors or therapy referrals. Point that out (to show that you are a step ahead of them) and then cut to the dilemma:

	:''"As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''		<blockquote>''As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''

	:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (by the way, women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults! See [[Media:Adultadult2.png\|Kinsey]], for example).''		''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (by the way, women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults! See [[Media:Adultadult2.png\|Kinsey]], for example).''

	:''2. With respect to the more important measure of negative ''psychological adjustment'', as my sources have shown, "CSA's" relationship with this, fades to statistical insignificance once we eliminate confounds. Moreover, the absence of simple consent (i.e. '''yes please/no, stop''', not informed consent, which is an arbitrary legal category) accounts for the ''vast bulk'' of whatever negative psychological adjustment outcome remains - something like 8:1. This strongly suggests that any association between willing sex and poor psychological adjustment is not only statistically insignificant, but likely to be due to confounding variables such as poor family environment. As for forceful interactions that lack simple consent, girls in particular are more commonly victims of this - but rather interestingly, this does not account for all of their reduced psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' substantially more negative subjective recall and marginally poorer psychological adjustment is highly indicative of misogynistic societal conditioning, resulting in slightly higher levels of iatrogenic/secondary harm.''		''2. With respect to the more important measure of negative ''psychological adjustment'', as my sources have shown, "CSA's" relationship with this, fades to statistical insignificance once we eliminate confounds. Moreover, the absence of simple consent (i.e. '''yes please/no, stop''', not informed consent, which is an arbitrary legal category) accounts for the ''vast bulk'' of whatever negative psychological adjustment outcome remains - something like 8:1. This strongly suggests that any association between willing sex and poor psychological adjustment is not only statistically insignificant, but likely to be due to confounding variables such as poor family environment. As for forceful interactions that lack simple consent, girls in particular are more commonly victims of this - but rather interestingly, this does not account for all of their reduced psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' substantially more negative subjective recall and marginally poorer psychological adjustment is highly indicative of misogynistic societal conditioning, resulting in slightly higher levels of iatrogenic/secondary harm.''

	:''3. So given what we now know about CSA statistics, your dilemma is - do you:''		''3. So given what we now know about CSA statistics, your dilemma is - do you:''

	:''3a. Endorse the present, overly-inclusive definition of CSA, which after including cases where simple consent was present, becomes empirically invalid, as it can not be said to reliably predict trauma. Or...''		''3a. Endorse the present, overly-inclusive definition of CSA, which after including cases where simple consent was present, becomes empirically invalid, as it can not be said to reliably predict trauma. Or...''

	:''3b. Endorse a new, carefully crafted definition in which force/coercion (lack of simple consent) forms the basis for determining abuse. Unlike 3a, this definition ''predicts'' ''some'' negative adjustment outcomes.''		''3b. Endorse a new, carefully crafted definition in which force/coercion (lack of simple consent) forms the basis for determining abuse. Unlike 3a, this definition ''predicts'' ''some'' negative adjustment outcomes.''

	:''4. From my perspective, 3b. is the preferred option - and should be met with a change in the law in which youth aged 12 and up can pre-declare by opting in to an emancipation program, provided they meet basic competencies.''		''4. From my perspective, 3b. is the preferred option - and should be met with a change in the law in which youth aged 12 and up can pre-declare by opting in to an emancipation program, provided they meet basic competencies.''

	:''5. In this sense, with existing laws against sexual assault, you will still criminalize true (harmful) CSA at least as efficiently - in fact, probably with more specificity. You likely also reduce the stigma and iatrogenic/secondary effects by a process of legalization and improved, rights-based education. What I have presented is essentially a moral dilemma of objective evidence based policy versus your personal "ick factor". As they say, you instinctively know that getting bitten by a dog is bad touch, but to feel shame and trauma after a voluntary "sex act" takes a lot of social conditioning."''		''5. In this sense, with existing laws against sexual assault, you will still criminalize true (harmful) CSA at least as efficiently - in fact, probably with more specificity. You likely also reduce the stigma and iatrogenic/secondary effects by a process of legalization and improved, rights-based education. What I have presented is essentially a moral dilemma of objective evidence based policy versus your personal "ick factor". As they say, you instinctively know that getting bitten by a dog is bad touch, but to feel shame and trauma after a voluntary "sex act" takes a lot of social conditioning.''</blockquote>

	By leaving your opponent with this dilemma, you are essentially covering the same philosophical ground as [[Rind et al]] in 1998, but extending it towards a broader policy outlook.		By leaving your opponent with this dilemma, you are essentially covering the same philosophical ground as [[Rind et al]] in 1998, but extending it towards a broader policy outlook.

	[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]][[Category:Cyber Activism]][[Category:Logic]][[Category:Debate]][[Category:Debating Points: Sociological]][[Category:Debating Points: Child/Minor]][[Category:Debating Points: Adult-Minor sex]][[Category: Debate Advice & Technique]]		[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]][[Category:Cyber Activism]][[Category:Logic]][[Category:Debate]][[Category:Debating Points: Sociological]][[Category:Debating Points: Child/Minor]][[Category:Debating Points: Adult-Minor sex]][[Category: Debate Advice & Technique]]

The Admins at 22:49, 14 January 2023

2023-01-14T22:49:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:49, 14 January 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	You can use a basic '''CSA dilemma strategy''' to shut down an adult-minor/child sex debate on the basis of informed vs simple consent and concept validity. We republish this in the form of a templated argument, but you should modify the text slightly for originality. Link a research list - primarily [[Research: Prevalence of Harm and Negative Outcomes\|outcomes]] or the [https://web.archive.org/web/20211021023155/https://cchain2021.tiiny.site/ Web Archive compo] of all 4 articles on CSA outcomes and harm causation. This is your evidence referred to in the following argument - used to contest your opponent's idea that sex between adults and minors is intrinsically or at least generally very harmful, therefore immoral. Often your opponent will use clinical/legal type sampling in their sources - but these are far too unrepresentative. This type of selective sampling could be used to classify all sex between two adults or two people of different races as harmful if the researcher only solicited input from assault survivors or therapy referrals. Point that out and then cut to the dilemma:		You can use a basic '''CSA dilemma strategy''' to shut down an adult-minor/child sex debate on the basis of informed vs simple consent and concept validity. We republish this in the form of a templated argument, but you should modify the text slightly for originality. Link a research list - primarily [[Research: Prevalence of Harm and Negative Outcomes\|outcomes]] or the [https://web.archive.org/web/20211021023155/https://cchain2021.tiiny.site/ Web Archive compo] of all 4 articles on CSA outcomes and harm causation. This is your evidence referred to in the following argument - used to contest your opponent's idea that sex between adults and minors is intrinsically or at least generally very harmful, therefore immoral. Often your opponent will use clinical/legal type sampling in their sources - but these are far too unrepresentative. This type of selective sampling could be used to classify all sex between two adults or two people of different races as harmful if the researcher only solicited input from assault survivors or therapy referrals. Point that out (to show that you are a step ahead of them) and then cut to the dilemma:

	:''"As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''		:''"As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''

	:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults~~, by the way - see~~ [[Media:Adultadult2.png\|Kinsey]]).''		:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (by the way, women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults! See [[Media:Adultadult2.png\|Kinsey]], for example).''

	:''2. With respect to negative psychological adjustment, "CSA" ~~has no significant~~ relationship with this ~~when~~ we eliminate confounds~~, etc~~. ~~However~~, the absence of simple consent (not informed consent - an arbitrary legal category) accounts for ~~by far~~ the bulk of negative psychological adjustment outcome - something like 8:1. ~~Girls~~ are more commonly ~~subjected to force~~, ~~but~~ this does not account for all of their ~~difference in~~ psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' more negative recall and ~~slightly worse~~ psychological adjustment is highly indicative of societal ~~misogynistic~~ conditioning, resulting in ~~the~~ slightly higher levels of iatrogenic harm.''		:''2. With respect to the more important measure of negative ''psychological adjustment'', as my sources have shown, "CSA's" relationship with this, fades to statistical insignificance once we eliminate confounds. Moreover, the absence of simple consent (i.e. '''yes please/no, stop''', not informed consent, which is an arbitrary legal category) accounts for the ''vast bulk'' of whatever negative psychological adjustment outcome remains - something like 8:1. This strongly suggests that any association between willing sex and poor psychological adjustment is not only statistically insignificant, but likely to be due to confounding variables such as poor family environment. As for forceful interactions that lack simple consent, girls in particular are more commonly victims of this - but rather interestingly, this does not account for all of their reduced psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' substantially more negative subjective recall and marginally poorer psychological adjustment is highly indicative of misogynistic societal conditioning, resulting in slightly higher levels of iatrogenic/secondary harm.''

	:''3. So your dilemma is~~, effectively~~ - do you:''		:''3. So given what we now know about CSA statistics, your dilemma is - do you:''

	:''3a. Endorse the present, overly-inclusive definition of CSA, which after including simple consent, becomes empirically invalid, as it can not be ~~proven~~ to ~~be inherently traumatogenic~~. Or...''		:''3a. Endorse the present, overly-inclusive definition of CSA, which after including cases where simple consent was present, becomes empirically invalid, as it can not be said to reliably predict trauma. Or...''

	:''3b. Endorse a new, carefully crafted definition in which force/coercion forms the basis for determining abuse. Unlike ~~the above one~~, this definition ''predicts'' ~~the~~ negative adjustment outcomes ~~(at least in some studies)~~.''		:''3b. Endorse a new, carefully crafted definition in which force/coercion (lack of simple consent) forms the basis for determining abuse. Unlike 3a, this definition ''predicts'' ''some'' negative adjustment outcomes.''

	:''4. From my perspective, 3b. is the preferred option - and should be met with a change in the law in which youth aged 12 and up can pre-declare by opting in to an emancipation program, provided they meet basic competencies.''		:''4. From my perspective, 3b. is the preferred option - and should be met with a change in the law in which youth aged 12 and up can pre-declare by opting in to an emancipation program, provided they meet basic competencies.''

	:''5. In this sense, with existing laws against sexual assault, you ~~exclude actual~~ (~~potentially~~ harmful) CSA ~~from the cohort just as well~~ as with ~~the previous law~~. You likely reduce the stigma and iatrogenic effects by a process of legalization and improved, rights-based education. What I have presented is essentially a moral dilemma of objective evidence based policy versus your personal "ick factor". As they say, you instinctively know that getting bitten by a dog is bad touch, but to feel shame and trauma after a voluntary "sex act" takes a lot of social conditioning."''		:''5. In this sense, with existing laws against sexual assault, you will still criminalize true (harmful) CSA at least as efficiently - in fact, probably with more specificity. You likely also reduce the stigma and iatrogenic/secondary effects by a process of legalization and improved, rights-based education. What I have presented is essentially a moral dilemma of objective evidence based policy versus your personal "ick factor". As they say, you instinctively know that getting bitten by a dog is bad touch, but to feel shame and trauma after a voluntary "sex act" takes a lot of social conditioning."''

	By leaving your opponent with this dilemma, you are essentially covering the same philosophical ground as [[Rind et al]] in 1998, but extending it towards a broader policy outlook.		By leaving your opponent with this dilemma, you are essentially covering the same philosophical ground as [[Rind et al]] in 1998, but extending it towards a broader policy outlook.

	[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]][[Category:Cyber Activism]][[Category:Logic]][[Category:Debate]][[Category:Debating Points: Sociological]][[Category:Debating Points: Child/Minor]][[Category:Debating Points: Adult-Minor sex]][[Category: Debate Advice & Technique]]		[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]][[Category:Cyber Activism]][[Category:Logic]][[Category:Debate]][[Category:Debating Points: Sociological]][[Category:Debating Points: Child/Minor]][[Category:Debating Points: Adult-Minor sex]][[Category: Debate Advice & Technique]]

The Admins at 22:23, 14 January 2023

2023-01-14T22:23:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:23, 14 January 2023
Line 3:		Line 3:
	:''"As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''		:''"As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''

	:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults, by the way - see Kinsey).''		:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults, by the way - see [[Media:Adultadult2.png\|Kinsey]]).''

	:''2. With respect to negative psychological adjustment, "CSA" has no significant relationship with this when we eliminate confounds, etc. However, the absence of simple consent (not informed consent - an arbitrary legal category) accounts for by far the bulk of negative psychological adjustment outcome - something like 8:1. Girls are more commonly subjected to force, but this does not account for all of their difference in psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' more negative recall and slightly worse psychological adjustment is highly indicative of societal misogynistic conditioning, resulting in the slightly higher levels of iatrogenic harm.''		:''2. With respect to negative psychological adjustment, "CSA" has no significant relationship with this when we eliminate confounds, etc. However, the absence of simple consent (not informed consent - an arbitrary legal category) accounts for by far the bulk of negative psychological adjustment outcome - something like 8:1. Girls are more commonly subjected to force, but this does not account for all of their difference in psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' more negative recall and slightly worse psychological adjustment is highly indicative of societal misogynistic conditioning, resulting in the slightly higher levels of iatrogenic harm.''

The Admins at 00:31, 30 July 2022

2022-07-30T00:31:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:31, 30 July 2022
Line 5:		Line 5:
	:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults, by the way - see Kinsey).''		:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults, by the way - see Kinsey).''

	:''2. With respect to psychological adjustment, "CSA" has no significant relationship with this. However, the absence of simple consent (not informed consent - an arbitrary legal category) accounts for by far the bulk of negative psychological adjustment outcome - something like 8:1. Girls are more commonly subjected to force, but this does not account for all of their difference in psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' more negative recall and slightly worse psychological adjustment is highly indicative of societal misogynistic conditioning, resulting in the slightly higher levels of iatrogenic harm.''		:''2. With respect to negative psychological adjustment, "CSA" has no significant relationship with this when we eliminate confounds, etc. However, the absence of simple consent (not informed consent - an arbitrary legal category) accounts for by far the bulk of negative psychological adjustment outcome - something like 8:1. Girls are more commonly subjected to force, but this does not account for all of their difference in psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' more negative recall and slightly worse psychological adjustment is highly indicative of societal misogynistic conditioning, resulting in the slightly higher levels of iatrogenic harm.''

	:''3. So your dilemma is, effectively - do you:''		:''3. So your dilemma is, effectively - do you:''

The Admins at 00:30, 30 July 2022

2022-07-30T00:30:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:30, 30 July 2022
Line 5:		Line 5:
	:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults, by the way - see Kinsey).''		:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults, by the way - see Kinsey).''

	:''2. With respect to psychological adjustment, "CSA" has no significant relationship with this. However, the absence of simple consent (not informed consent - an arbitrary legal category) accounts for by far the bulk of negative psychological adjustment outcome - something like 8:1. Girls are more commonly subjected to force, but this does not account for all ~~the~~ difference in adjustment. In other words, girls' more negative recall and slightly worse adjustment is highly indicative of ~~post-event~~ misogynistic conditioning, resulting in the slightly higher levels of iatrogenic harm.''		:''2. With respect to psychological adjustment, "CSA" has no significant relationship with this. However, the absence of simple consent (not informed consent - an arbitrary legal category) accounts for by far the bulk of negative psychological adjustment outcome - something like 8:1. Girls are more commonly subjected to force, but this does not account for all of their difference in psychological adjustment when compared to boys. In other words, girls' more negative recall and slightly worse psychological adjustment is highly indicative of societal misogynistic conditioning, resulting in the slightly higher levels of iatrogenic harm.''

	:''3. So your dilemma is, effectively - do you:''		:''3. So your dilemma is, effectively - do you:''

The Admins at 00:27, 30 July 2022

2022-07-30T00:27:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:27, 30 July 2022
Line 3:		Line 3:
	:''"As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''		:''"As I see it, your argument brings up the following dilemma:''

	:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (~~adult~~ women also react just as negatively, by the way).''		:''1. As my sources show, boys' later subjective recall of minor-adult sex is overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Girls' recall is more often negative, i.e. they are more likely to feel they have been abused (women also react just as negatively if they were initiated as adults, by the way - see Kinsey).''

	:''2. With respect to psychological adjustment, "CSA" has no significant relationship with this. However, the absence of simple consent (not informed consent - an arbitrary legal category) accounts for by far the bulk of negative psychological adjustment outcome - something like 8:1. Girls are more commonly subjected to force, but this does not account for all the difference in adjustment. In other words, girls' more negative recall and slightly worse adjustment is highly indicative of post-event misogynistic conditioning, resulting in the slightly higher levels of iatrogenic harm.''		:''2. With respect to psychological adjustment, "CSA" has no significant relationship with this. However, the absence of simple consent (not informed consent - an arbitrary legal category) accounts for by far the bulk of negative psychological adjustment outcome - something like 8:1. Girls are more commonly subjected to force, but this does not account for all the difference in adjustment. In other words, girls' more negative recall and slightly worse adjustment is highly indicative of post-event misogynistic conditioning, resulting in the slightly higher levels of iatrogenic harm.''