Haiku
| April 30th, 2004A man rapes a girl;
She discovers she’s pregnant.
In Texas, they wed.
I’m blogging under the heading of SSM. Readers will certainly wonder: Does pedophilia have anything to do with SSM? Oddly enough, it would seem that some justify banning SSM to prevent pedophilia.
Ordinarily we are not told how banning SSM prevents pedophilia. Now, thanks to a discussion at Galois, I think I may be beginning to identify the main elements of the argument which seems to be called “the procreative model”.
Currently, I believe the premise, evidence and conclusions of the procreative model, with regard to pedophilia, are as follows:
Premise: The only logical way to regulate sex is to determine whether the sex is procreative or not.
Evidence:
a) We don’t let gays marry because they can’t impregnate each other unintentionally.
b) We don’t let kids have sex because they can’t impregnate each other unintentionally.
c) We don’t let adults have sex with kids because kids can’t get pregnant unintentionally.Conclusion: If we let gays who can’t impregnate each other marry, we would be required to permit adults and to have sex with kids!
Of course, it isn’t my model. I may be misrepresenting it. Other can read the extensive discussion at Galois and suggest alternatives consistent with the posted comments.
My haiku?
I think it captures an interesting feature of the procreative model. Those who read the posts appearing on April 27 and April 28, will learn that, just maybe, it’s not so bad if a pedophile impregnates a 14 year old girl. Possibly, if she is a wise, traditional, responsible girl, she will marry the father of her child.
To read the entire surreal discussion,visit Galois The pedophilia discussion heats up with on April 18, 2004. (Note that the time stamps appear at the end of the posts).
April 30th, 2004 at 11:32 am
You might want to fix the link - I got it to work after deleting some bits, but it doesn’t work when you click on it.
“Surreal discussion” is right, btw!
This comment was written by kasasagi.Report this comment to the moderators
April 30th, 2004 at 11:32 am
That is pretty scary, trying to redefine legal sexual activity in terms of procreative possibilities instead of consent. By his standards, to prove that an act is pedophilia, all you need to do is see if the girl has started menstruating. If so, it’s legal! Humbert Humberts of the world, rejoice!
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
April 30th, 2004 at 12:50 pm
Here is the correct link.
This comment was written by Gabriel Rosenberg.Report this comment to the moderators
April 30th, 2004 at 1:46 pm
That was sodd! The html looks right in the entry box at movable Type — but evidently there is more than one type of ” quote mark! I think they are ok now.
This comment was written by lucia.Report this comment to the moderators
April 30th, 2004 at 6:33 pm
Reading all those posts, what scares me is how important lack of education is to the whole debate. Bringing the incest argument into it only works if you don’t understand that the incest taboo is woven into human nature and the homosexual taboo is not. But that’s only something you’d know by reading alot. Most people don’t know that and therefore they are open to that argument.
This comment was written by Amanda.Report this comment to the moderators
April 30th, 2004 at 9:14 pm
Actually, I think it has something to do with current marriage laws in some states that permit marriage of children as young as 13 (or younger, but I’m not aware of the youngest age). Apparently male-on-female pedophilia is just dandy with God whereas the male-on-male or female-on-female pedophilia that could result in those same states if gay marriage was made legal (Unless they… duh.. raised the limits so that it’s ADULT marriage not glorified pedophilia?)
Or maybe it’s the slippery-slope argument of “If the cant-procreate aspect of outlawing marriage is null and void, what stops horrible things like a lady who wants to marry her St Bernard?!” (Forgetting, for a moment that legal marriage can be considered a contract between two adults–something that a child or a dog cannot enter into under law, nor should they be able to since it involves consent.) They also like to conveniently ignore the fact that known-infertile couples or people with no intention or no ability marry all the time. “But they may intend to adopt!” screech the bible thumpers. (Forgetting that gay people often adopt.)
Or maybe it’s the whole “Anyone who does not share my moral superiority is obviously mentally immature and can be considered a child” thing where everyone’s just in a horrible sinful phase that they’ll grow out of.
No matter which way you slice it, it’s absurd.
This comment was written by sara.Report this comment to the moderators
May 1st, 2004 at 5:36 am
Well.. I have a tendency to google a lot, find sources and click read lots of stuff:
Actually, I think it has something to do with current marriage laws in some states that permit marriage of children as young as 13
1) 14 year olds can get married in Texas with parental consent. I think you can marry even younger with a judges permission. (See: (See 2.009). Those under 14 years of age can marry with a judges permission. See 2.103 for provisions to permit those under the age of 14 to marry.).
2) I found page at Cornel Universitythat indicates the lowest marriage age in Kansas is 12 for a girl and 13 for a boy. I was not able to confirm this at the Kansas statutes page. (and I can’t find the link. But if you google, it’s at cornel, and it’s a big table.)
3) The table at Cornel has an incorrect listing for Utah– 15. Utah seems to have changed their age of consent in 1999, if you read the statute you’ll see it says the age of consent is 14– as l isted in the table– but it says until some day in 1999. (Utah’s motive based on web pages: Too many young girls were being married off to poligamists! Yep. Polygamy and pedophilia. Oh.. and I didn’t read this in the web pages, but weren’t the Olympics around then? I remember Utah was *really* embarrassed by when the international press strated strolling around and finding “mature” 14 year old brides who’d been married off with parental consent. Seems some of those brides begged the reporters to rescues them!)
Actually, I’m not sure how the “proceative model” blocks polygamy. We didn’t get into that. (Not sure I want to. If his model can’t or won’t block what I consider pedophilia, I’d really rather stick with mine!)
Sara… if you do read the “whole schmear”, you will notice you guessed wrong here:to marry her St Bernard?!”. Ben was concerned, not about sex bewteen a woman and a dog, but between a man and Bessy the cow!
This comment was written by lucia.Report this comment to the moderators
May 2nd, 2004 at 1:59 pm
Hey, dig this: Child Jesse Taylor has a new job… with Jerry Springer! The laughs just never stop.
This comment was written by smitty.Report this comment to the moderators
May 2nd, 2004 at 4:54 pm
long ago, i learned there are 3 topics that can’t be discussed reasonably online, abortion, nambla, and file-sharing.
This comment was written by arbitraryaardvark.contest: write best haiku using all 3.
i want to point out that rape and pedophilia are words with strong emotional impact (connotation) and lucia seems to be redefining them in ways that change the argument (denotation). if i understand correctly, rape here means sex between two people who want to have sex, and pedophilia means having attractions that include teenage girls. these words are not always understood to have those meanings, so i see possible misunderstandings coming from a failure to define key terms.
Report this comment to the moderators
May 2nd, 2004 at 6:17 pm
Haiku II
Statutory rape
of a fourteen year old girl.
That’s rape around here.
=========
I’ll admit, I sort of wanted to wedge statutory in the first haiku and tell the same story. But you know, there’s that 5 syllable, 7 syllable 5 syllable requirement.
I’m going to attempt the NAMBLA haiku.. but I think I’ll skip the file sharing!
I’ll admit, I do think intercourse between a man and a 14 year old is pedophilia. Other’s may not, in which case, they should just say ” I don’t think it is.” (And I’ll disagree.)
Changing intercourse to “attraction”, and 14 year old to “teen” which might include 19, does makes the idea sound like somethign quite different. If you think I’ve grossly mischaracterized, the conversation, the link and read. Then tell me the conversation was about adult men being “attracted” to 18 years olds!
But.. click.. read… tell me that conversation was about men being attracted to 18 year olds.. or … what?
This comment was written by lucia.Report this comment to the moderators
May 2nd, 2004 at 7:24 pm
Haiku III: for Ardvark!
NAMBLA advocates
This comment was written by lucia.sex with fourteen year old boys.
Pedophilia.
Report this comment to the moderators
May 2nd, 2004 at 10:51 pm
currently leading contestant: lucia.
This comment was written by arbitraryaardvark.i had sampled the conversation you pointed to and didn’t follow it well; i won’t make claims about what it was about.
Report this comment to the moderators
May 3rd, 2004 at 5:21 am
Haiku’s for aardvark!
I think I’m going to win the contest! Is there a deadline?
========
The Downloading Haiku
We want free music.
Let’s download it endlessly.
What, it’s illegal?
=====
The Abortion Haiku
Pro choice advocates:
“Let’s keep abortion legal.”
Opponents say “no.”
==========================
This comment was written by lucia.aardvark: i won’t make claims about what it was about.
Fair enough!
Report this comment to the moderators
May 3rd, 2004 at 7:40 am
The all in one Haiku:
Let’s download music
Abort many fetuses
And have sex with kids
Bam! How you like me now?
This comment was written by Raznor.Report this comment to the moderators
May 3rd, 2004 at 8:02 am
Drat! I got competition…..
This comment was written by lucia.Report this comment to the moderators
May 3rd, 2004 at 7:34 pm
Haiku’s for aardvark!
I think I’m going to win!
Is there a deadline?
after consulting a panel of celebrity judges, we have a winner. still, entries and bribes accepted, i’m an arbitrary sort of aardvark.
This comment was written by arbitraryaardvark.Report this comment to the moderators
May 3rd, 2004 at 10:31 pm
I need to bribe those
Celebrity judges, but
I’m a poor student
Also, are tankas
This comment was written by Raznor.Acceptable for our small
Competition, if
So consider this longer
One a newer entry, yes?
Report this comment to the moderators
May 4th, 2004 at 5:27 am
Raznor posts tankas!
I don’t think I can compete,
his skills are too great.
Money talks loudly,
I have a lot of money.
I’d best pay the bribe.
If aardvark extends
This comment was written by lucia.the deadline for poor raznor
I resolve to sue!
Report this comment to the moderators
May 4th, 2004 at 10:37 pm
to claim orlando
This comment was written by arbitraryaardvark.grand prize vacation package,
send aardvark blank check.
Report this comment to the moderators
November 4th, 2004 at 11:15 pm
http://www.rapehaiku.com - Not what you think :/
This comment was written by Dave Dillwiller.Report this comment to the moderators