Trumped

[Adam]

How in the hell did this topic come up?

[Adam]

[Tank]

43 minutes ago, Steven said:

this is incorrect and they aren't both right.

the original question was whether a 7 year old knows if they are sexually abusing/assaulting someone. nate says no, but he is incorrect. no matter how slow or fast someone develops, a 7 year old is absolutely capable of knowing what they are doing and why they are doing it.

i just texted a friend of mine that is a therapist specifically working with children (abused/troubled kids) for about 10 years that fit into this exact equation or situation. i will share her clinical response to put this to bed so that we can get back to jay and glen's dick swinging contest of hating the other side.

if children weren't capable of recognizing their actions or repercussions, we wouldn't need someone like her and her field because these troubled kids or the ones that were sexually assaulted wouldn't be cognizant of what happened or is happening when it happens.

i think this stems from the article about the fat chick from the show girls that said she molested her sister or some shit like that. the article and her account of what happened negates name's point because she admits to being aware of what was going on and exploring.

so does your therapist friend think all kids develop at the same pace cognitively and socially? if so, i'm going to disagree, especially as it relates to sexual development. there are a lot of social, environmental, and even religious factors that must be considered. 

[Brandon]

of course not, don't be silly. that wasn't even the topic they were talking about.

take away her masters degree and even she isn't dumb enough to say kids develop the same. do special ed kids develop the same as honor students?

it's moot. that was never the point. the whole conversation revolved around whether children cognitively know what they are doing when they touch other kids inappropriately.

[Kevin]

53 minutes ago, Adam said:

How in the hell did this topic come up?

AngelsWin.com

[Angelsjunky]

16 minutes ago, Steven said:

of course not, don't be silly. that wasn't even the topic they were talking about.

take away her masters degree and even she isn't dumb enough to say kids develop the same. do special ed kids develop the same as honor students?

it's moot. that was never the point. the whole conversation revolved around whether children cognitively know what they are doing when they touch other kids inappropriately.

Yes, AND they (generally) know less than, say, a 15 year old, just as a 15 year old (generally) knows less than a 25 year old, just as a 25 year old (generally) knows less than a 50 year old.

The very phrase "sexual assault" implies both sexual and malicious intent. Your therapist friend likely knows that 7 year olds are (generally) less capable of sexual and malicious intent than adults.

 

[nate]

It's probably his same friend that says vaccines contain harmful doses of lead.

 

When that shit came out about that annoying chick from that show tons of therapists came out and defended her. 

[Brandon]

I don't have any friends that are pro or not pro vaccinations you little twat. I just figured I would ask because I saw two random people not remotely related to the psychological field arguing about a child's intent in the middle of a Donald Trump thread. I don't even have a dog in the fight, just know someone that knows more than the both of you in the field. I don't need to be right or cool on the internet. I won't include my responses or questions as her's seem to sum up the point without the whole dialogue:

It's kind of the greatest therapy answer ever: it depends. I'd say 99% of the time they don't know what they are doing or more likely they've been sexually abused and were acting out their abuse. There's always the exception though of really smart fucking kids who are sociopathic predators, but it's beyond rare.

Sure, they do experience biological urges, but they don't usually recognize those impulses as being labeled as "sexual" or wrong or private....or realize the social constructs behind sexuality.

Most of the time they say they are wrestling and then something felt different/weird/good. I've also had kids, who in their court reports, it says they lived in a garage and witnessed their mom turning tricks for drugs. Then they're seen humping their little brother or whatever. The foster parents want to say their (the kids) abuse and what a bad kid, but they're not realizing the history.

Meh, valid question. I wouldn't know either if I didn't work with these kids every day.

So there you have it. Figured instead of watching you two go back and forth not really knowing what you're talking about, I'd just get an answer straight from the horses mouth. 

[Angelsjunky]

Which is similar to what I said, Steven. I agree with your therapist friend.

[Lou]

11 hours ago, captain howdy said:

Thrifty ice cream was the best.

Not only did it taste great, it didn't kill you when you consumed it.

was? 

still is

[Lou]

6 hours ago, Tank said:

 

okay, both of you are right and both of you are wrong.

what you're both neglecting here is that some kids develop emotionally (and physically) faster than others, while some develop slower than others. you will find 7 year olds that know a reasonable amount about reproduction, some that know a few simple things, and some that know nothing about it. there is absolutely no one-size-fits-all on the spectrum of this particular knowledge for children. i'm pretty sure all of us had at least one friend in high school who didn't know jack squat about sex, right?

so if said high school friend, let's say, inserted pebbles in a girl's vagina without her consent, it wouldn't be sexual assault? 

what you are saying is that ignorance is a defense when committing a crime. 

[Amazing Larry]

Back on topic... I recommend this excellent article fact checking a recent NBC/WSJ pole. 

How the hell does the media get away with this?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-11/first-post-debate-poll-gives-hillary-significant-lead-and-familiar-problem-emerges

[Tank]

1 hour ago, Lou said:

so if said high school friend, let's say, inserted pebbles in a girl's vagina without her consent, it wouldn't be sexual assault? 

what you are saying is that ignorance is a defense when committing a crime. 

i'm not trying to say that at all. never even entered my mind.

i imagine a high school kid who did something like what you're suggesting would be headed for a huge amount of legal problems. and yes, at the age of a high school student, i'd consider this a sexual assault.

[InsideThePark]

It's not uncommon for poles to skew a bit one way or the other. They're anticipating that the turnout will be more democratic like it has been the past couple elections.

I think the biggest thing about the poll you're referencing is that it came immediately after the leaked tape, and two of the three days in that poll were before the debate. I think it's safe to say he made up some ground by going nuclear. The polls will get closer but this race is effectively over barring an incriminating revelation, which doesn't seem likely.

[Glen]

10 hours ago, Jay said:

Congrats you fact-checked a facebook meme.

Likewise x congrats for posting it. I'm sure you took it as gospel. 

[cez]

Worse than just about any Trump or Hillary supporter is the nihilist.  Very adolescent / South Park. 

[nate]

 

[Adam]

[Taylor]

19 hours ago, Lawrence said:

They will vote for the only qualified candidate.

Deez Nuts?

[Amazing Larry]

1 hour ago, Taylor said:

Deez Nuts?

Harambe

[Adam]

[nate]

 

[InsideThePark]

But.... but... Bill Clinton!

[the dude abides]

More of Trump being a perv (and a bit of a pedo)

Yeah, I know, "but Clinton".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/10/12/former-miss-arizona-trump-just-came-strolling-right-in-on-naked-contestants/

 

[Spirit]