I’m often taken for between 16 and 19. No one can honestly give me above 20 years old based on appearance alone. Wether my genetic makeup is responsible wholly or partially for this, I have no idea. While I like looking younger, I don’t do much of anything towards highlighting it though.

Note: I don’t *typically* wear lolita fashion (pretty rarely actually), but it’s clear as day to people that I don’t look pre-pubescent, even in such clothing.

@Jesse

I have a cousin of a cousin who is male and named Jessie. French-Canadian, but well, maybe names differ for that reason? I couldn’t say, but there you go: a male Jessie.

@Mandolin (comment #94, though apparently, some comments vanished since the thread’s original, so numbering changed as well, its the current number as of today)

“Young women are frequent targets of sexual assault. When we condemn people like pedophiles, we need to take into account that we highly sexualize young children. We, as a culture, are creating the conditions that create pedophiliac response, whether the people who engage in that sexual fantasy are paraphiliacs (can only be aroused by their fetish) or men who have both normal and abnormal sexual response.”

I’d point to wikipedia’s article on lolicon, which says:

“Some critics claim that the lolicon genre contributes to actual sexual abuse of children,[7][8] while others claim that there is no evidence for this,[9][8] or that there is evidence to the contrary.
…
An argument is that obscene fictional images portray children as sex objects, thereby contributing to child sexual abuse. This argument has been disputed by the claim that there is no scientific basis for that connection,[32] and that restricting sexual expression in drawings or animated games and videos might actually increase the rate of sexual crime by eliminating a harmless outlet for desires that could motivate crime.[9] This is exemplified in a case involving a man, from Virginia who, while arrested after viewing lolicon at a public library, asserted that he had quit collecting real child pornography and switched to lolicon.
…
Milton Diamond and Ayako Uchiyama observe a strong correlation between the dramatic rise of pornographic material in Japan from the 1970s onwards and a dramatic decrease in reported sexual violence, including crimes by juveniles and assaults on children under 13. They cite similar findings in Denmark and West Germany. In their summary, they state that the concern that countries with widespread availability of sexually explicit material would suffer increased rates of sexual crimes was not validated; and that the reduction of sexual crimes in Japan during that period may have been influenced by a variety of factors they had described in their study.[10]”

—————-

By this reasoning, there’s yet to be a scientifically proven reason for this to happen. If mangas featuring teenage girls who half look like children (but still with puberty-induced features) don’t increase pedophilia, I don’t think 18 years old who look like 16 would, either.

I think Britney Spears and others like her are more responsible for the self-sexualization (by advertising proxy) of children (and especially girls), who view them as idols. I may be mistaken, but I don’t think children typically idolize porn stars, however young they might look, because they’re not typically public.

I was surprised myself to read on this from Japan, a truly patriarchal society which makes the US and Canada look like nothing. Where a man saying “I love you” to his wife of 20 years, is seen as too hard to do and unmanly if done.

Also: Laws that let anyone change their mind about anything involving any risk, to avoid any negative consequences. Yeah, let’s do that, too.

If there’s more to be said on the original topic of the post, I’ll be happy to participate again, but this feels like a derail now, so I’m out.

1) What I interpreted. It’s not uncommon to refer to women as girls, even women in their thirties or older. It’s something that people have blogged about a lot, and while its effect is diminishing I think (both because people have started to knock it off, and also because there’s more of a tendency to refer to men as boys), it’s still present and goes well with the kind of patriarchal myth-making that’s tapped into by the slam about calling people who are anti-porn prudes, as if being anti-porn means being anti-sex.

2) What you interpreted. This guy is defending the rights of people who he thinks are actually children to act in porn. I expect this isn’t the case, though if he wants to come back into the thread and talk about how fourrteen-year-olds should totally doff it for cash, then I’ll stand corrected. But if it is the case - I think this condemns his position much more than my interpretation. I think many fourteen-year-olds are sexual and capable of meaningful consent — with other fourteen-year-olds. As Amanda at Pandagon says, young people should be able to explore their own sexuality without skeezy dudes leering at the boundaries to make sex objects of them.

when someone comes in to plug their rights as adults, and calls them girls, he’s being a hypocrite.

Again, you’re reading something into the comment that just isn’t there. He starts out by referring to 18 year old girls and remains consistent to that. There is no mention of “rights as adults”, only of “rights”.

Also, whatever I think, when someone comes in to plug their rights as adults, and calls them girls, he’s being a hypocrite. My particular perspective is irrelevant; it’s inconsistent for dude to come in with the premise they’re adults and then minimize them by calling them girls — inconsistent with his position that is, but consistent with misogyny.

There’s no hypocrisy in a plea to respect the choices of girls (or boys) anyway: even children are capable of making choices for themselves. The real hypocrisy is asking for 18-21 year old women to be treated like children without admitting that’s how you see them.

Bonus points: feminists are prudes, and a plea to respect the choices of 18 year olds while calling them girls. I call troll, and boring.

Come on, prudes: get over your revulsion–for the sake of the girls, if not for yourselves. Because it’s people like you who validate the notion that having done porn is somehow a shameful, stupid thing. And that is what damages the girls.

Myca @ 156: Bingo.

The big open-ended question in here is, how does industry exploit the emotional expectations of those who have been emotionally abused?

If you’ve been brought up to think that you’re a poor (memberofgender) if you don’t work yourself into an early grave, are you equipped to set boundaries for yourself in a job that wants you to do just that?

An industry with a very innocuous reputation harmed me very badly, because I was never taught to be on my guard against it. Another with a less savory reputation left me with a positive experience, because I had learned to be on my guard and set my own boundaries. I found it interesting that in the sex industry the fact that I was only willing to work on my own terms, though the specific limits I set made it hard for my income to be high, was not a deal-breaker, whereas in the nine-to-five world when I explain — cautiously, and with an eye to compromise — that I don’t want my job to make me ill, and need a full eight hours of sleep nightly which I can’t get if waking too early in the morning, they look at me like I’m utterly useless and refuse to hire me.

(Bitter-who-meeee?)

I think my good experience with the sex industry was due to a number of causes (upbringing, area, pre-existing standards) and that the basic feminist criticism of the sex industry probably helped me out before I ever doffed me duds. I’m quite thankful for that.

At the same time, I really, really wish that those of us who have the drive to be politically active would turn, in numbers, to improving working conditions across the board, rather than occasionally remarking on it in amongst huge anti-porn foo-fa-rahs. I understand the white-collar enemy is more entrenched, and daunting, and he’s everyone’s boss. It’s far, far easier to pick on the sex industry — workers, exploiters, and allies alike. Smaller target, less friends. And yet — I could have a liveable job again, if only I were willing to keep my gender card in order. (I decided after a long time that I’m not.)

Hehe, did I get ranty? I think I got ranty. Anyone in Portland hiring part-time?