My claim is not that “Don’t have sex with children.” is a bad rule because some children like sex, my claim is that it is primarily the continued enforcement of that rule which causes that rule to be useful at all. Unlike in the case with the king and peasant wife. The peasant’s wife really doesn’t want to engage in sex with the king but she realizes it might be better off for her because of the way things are ran. The situation I presented is one in which the child is not forced into anything, child rape should be legalized for the same reasons as all other forms, but if the child has no serious opposition to touching a genital, then i don’t see why we should morally judge it.
I think you’re completely failing to take into account culture and soft pressure and the effect they have on forcing people to do what they don’t want to.
A) Children are CONSTANTLY made to do things they don’t want to do by parents and other adults. Schoolwork, cleaning their room, eating their vegetables, etc. etc. IF a child does not want to have sex but is dutiful and thinks it’s expected of them, they will probably do it anyway. The same thing can also easily happen with the influence of other children, where kids are constantly and easily tricked into believing that something they find uncomfortable or weird is the right thing to do.
B) Someone can be extremely uncomfortable with what they’re doing and you could EASILY not recognize it, if they’re too scared to show it. I have known this to happen with an adult, and a child would be massively more susceptible to it. The heuristic “Don’t molest children if they tell you not to” just does not work to prevent this.
The massive difference in power and knowledge between the two parties is a core part of the problem. While the lovely situation you want to envisage where all parties respect and like each other equally, and know all about sex and are 100 percent consensual might be possible, it does not seem likely.
My claim is not that “Don’t have sex with children.” is a bad rule because some children like sex, my claim is that it is primarily the continued enforcement of that rule which causes that rule to be useful at all. Unlike in the case with the king and peasant wife. The peasant’s wife really doesn’t want to engage in sex with the king but she realizes it might be better off for her because of the way things are ran. The situation I presented is one in which the child is not forced into anything, child rape should be legalized for the same reasons as all other forms, but if the child has no serious opposition to touching a genital, then i don’t see why we should morally judge it.
I think you’re completely failing to take into account culture and soft pressure and the effect they have on forcing people to do what they don’t want to.
A) Children are CONSTANTLY made to do things they don’t want to do by parents and other adults. Schoolwork, cleaning their room, eating their vegetables, etc. etc. IF a child does not want to have sex but is dutiful and thinks it’s expected of them, they will probably do it anyway. The same thing can also easily happen with the influence of other children, where kids are constantly and easily tricked into believing that something they find uncomfortable or weird is the right thing to do.
B) Someone can be extremely uncomfortable with what they’re doing and you could EASILY not recognize it, if they’re too scared to show it. I have known this to happen with an adult, and a child would be massively more susceptible to it. The heuristic “Don’t molest children if they tell you not to” just does not work to prevent this.
The massive difference in power and knowledge between the two parties is a core part of the problem. While the lovely situation you want to envisage where all parties respect and like each other equally, and know all about sex and are 100 percent consensual might be possible, it does not seem likely.
You mean criminalized.