Debate Guide: Child sexualisation and objectification

Multiple generations have been bombarded with both sexual marketing, and reactionary messaging claiming that "sexualisation" is epidemic

If minors are permitted to engage in sexual activity, what is to stop our descent to outright degeneracy by way of the "sexual marketplace" working its way to a logical conclusion?

We will be left with a generation of minors and young adults who believe they must act sexually to please older people; that their only value is as sex objects!

The argument that adults "constantly having sex" with one another (if they aren't already) may result from an initial moderate reform, is a type of slippery slope fallacy (see below). The argument as stated above, also fails to explain why that outcome would be (or is already) a bad thing, relying on reactionary historical assumptions concerning "degeneracy" and societal collapse.

Rights and agency for young people are what pro-reform individuals are seeking, with respect to say, minors participating in online fiction spaces and having incrementally more control over their bodies as they enter their teens. If fully emancipated adults (who vary widely in power) have not reached this state of frenzied hyper-sexuality today, what reason can your opponent provide to suggest that it would be the case for younger people tomorrow? What do these suspicions say about how society really perceives young peoples' sexuality vs the fantasy of keeping them in a state of perpetual innocence? Assuming (falsely) young minds are so malleable and fallible, would young people really have evolved to become not only so highly sexed, but capable of procreation? Who, or what is seeking to use this to their advantage, and how are they using culture to manipulate young minds?

Paranoia

When addressing this argument in most contexts, you want to use nit-picking and sophistry to force the person using it to deploy increasingly paranoid, reactionary and conspiratorial tropes. Once they have run out of problematic arguments, they will either back down, repeat themselves or say something even more absurd. After all, most of these arguments rely on extant religious fears centering on original sin and temptation, the idea sexuality is some insidious force that "poisons" or "takes over" a person's entire life.

This argument is also highly sexualizing towards minor-minor and minor-adult relationships, erasing the importance of platonic aspects. This article goes into detail about that rather basic flaw in thinking about concepts that are alien to the beholder.

Is "sex" objectifying?

There are also problems with conceptualizing "sexual" relations as especially 'objectifying'. All this appears to demonstrate is sex-negativity or erotophobia in your opponent; the will by one political constituency in society to seize upon a positive evaluation of an individual's relationship and reinterpret it as vicious and shameful. With respect to sex (money, religion, platonic relationships, or indeed anything) young people must be taught that all adults are fallible, and they have an obligation (to themselves) to question the motives and judgment of others if the need arises. If each partner respects the other's self-worth, rational self-interest will lead them to work together with an enthusiasm not otherwise possible.

Finally, if sex is uncontrollable, present in young people and inherently objectifying, what is a healthy sexuality? Is repression really an answer?

Slippery slope

When expressed as per the lede of this article, this argument qualifies as a slippery slope fallacy (a type of informal fallacy). This may also be known as a domino, or "thin end of the wedge" fallacy.

See also

• Sexualization - a fundamental flaw in the concept.
• Text of Human Rights and the denial of sexual freedom - Anti-erotophobic text.