"Pedophile" means lover of children.
And Michael Jackson does love children apart from any sexual attraction. He loves to make them happy and be constantly in their company. He doesn't have any adult relationships his only close relationships are with young boys. Remember how he was really in love with MacCauley Calkins and

that AIDS kid Ryan White?
So is he also a pedophile in terms of 288 of the California penal code touching meant to arouse? Yes, he was almost doing it on the air with Gavin.
And it is only "normal" (or inevitable) to want to touch a person you are in love with (as distinct from a blood relative whom you "love") and get sexual pleasure.
Of course Michael is just a big kid so it's really only like a lot of *** boys playing grabass or wrestling. (of course the DA in Santa Barbara is taking the literal view and sees this as an adult doing bad stuff)
1 2 3 4
And paedophilia is a mental disorder.
And Michael Jackson does love children apart from any sexual attraction. He loves to make them happy and be constantly ... Ryan White? So is he also a pedophile in terms of 288 of the California penal code touching meant to arouse?

I dont believe there is a penal code in any civilized country that incriminates paedophilia per se.
Yes, he was almost doing it on the air with Gavin. And it is only "normal" (or inevitable) to want ... course the DA in Santa Barbara is taking the literal view and sees this as an adult doing bad stuff)

I am not familiar with MJ's tribulations, but I believe that, if what you wrote is true, paedophilia is his best defense.
And paedophilia is a mental disorder.

And people who commit crimes under the compulsion of a mental order are treated for the disorder usually in confinement until they recover (if they ever do).
And Michael Jackson does love children apart from any sexual attraction.

How can you tell>
He loves to make them happy and be constantly in their company.

I love to make attractive young ladies happy and be constantly in their company. Being married to a divorce lawyer, I sublimate the sexual part.
He doesn't have any adult relationships his only close relationships are with young boys.

Is this supposed to be normal?
Remember how he was really in love with MacCauley Calkins

Culkin
and that AIDS kid Ryan White? So is he also a pedophile in terms of 288 of the California penal code touching meant to arouse?

I dont believe there is a penal code in any civilized country that incriminates paedophilia per se.

Agreed. See below
Yes, he was almost doing it on the air with ... a blood relative whom you "love") and get sexual pleasure.

Andrew, you are one sick puppy.
Of course Michael is just a big kid so it's ... view and sees this as an adult doing bad stuff)

Of course. Do you have a better idea?
If it weren't you, Andrew, I'd suspect a spoof.
I am not familiar with MJ's tribulations, but I believe that, if what you wrote is true, paedophilia is his best defense.

American law is very good at drawing distinctions.

There's no law against being a drug addict. There are laws against buying, selling, or possessing controlled substances. Chris Rock does a hilarious bit about medical marijuana it's okay to use it, but you can't buy it or possess it; it must descend from heaven as a burning toke. But there is a point to this addition is a status, not an action. The law criminalizes conduct, not status. (Okay, that's an oversimplification. No need to inundate the group with exceptions.)
The current position of the US military on homosexuality remains "Don't ask, don't tell." We don't care how gay you are as long as you don't do or say anything about it. Status okay, conduct not.

Same for pedophilia. Love kids all you want, but don't act on it. If Jacko goes to Jail-o, it will be for what he did. It does seem worth pointing out that children at the receiving end of sexual encounters with adults are indeed victims. We're not talking victimless crime here.
Is there a tremendous amount of hypocrisy revealed by the foregoing? Hell, yes. I'm not defending most of it. But I do think it appropriate to criminalize sex offenses involving children. If someone's mental condition is such that he cannot avoid committing such offenses, there are institutions in which he can be confined for his own protection and the protection of potential victims. Is that where Michael Jackson should wind up? Is it where he will wind up? It's not as if you get to go home if you obtain an acquittal using the defense of mental disease or defect.

Bob Lieblich
Do we know what we're talking about here?
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
"Pedophile" means lover of children. And Michael Jackson does love children apart from any sexual attraction. He loves to make ... course the DA in Santa Barbara is taking the literal view and sees this as an adult doing bad stuff)

See the latest South Park.
But I do think it appropriate to criminalize sex offenses involving children. If someone's mental condition is such that ... be confined for his own protection and the protection of potential victims. Is that where Michael Jackson should wind up?

Yes, if he is a pedophiliac. For the protections you mentioned above.
Is it where he will wind up? It's not as if you get to go home if you obtain an acquittal using the defense of mental disease or defect.

It beats prison, where the child molestors and pedophliacs get the worst treatment from their cell mates.
If MJ is a paedophiliac, he needs medical care. And compassion. In this respect, I don't share the moral outrage of the inmates. (Why are so many people outraged by paedophilia, which is a mental disease? There is a theory about repression, similar to homophobia.)
Bob Lieblich Do we know what we're talking about here?

You mean the difference between a pedophiliac and a depraved child molester?

I'm not sure.
It does seem worth pointing out that children at the receiving end of sexual encounters with adults are indeed victims.

Have you ever been approached by a 14-year-old who put his hand down the front of your pants and said "I want that in me"? I have.

If I grant his request, is the kid a victim? Am I a criminal?

At what age does a "child" become an "adult" when it comes to having sex with someone older? Most European countries have an age of consent of 16 (http://www.ageofconsent.com).
At what age does a "child" become sexually functional and able to make rational decisions about his/her sexual partners? Does the law recognize this? Certainly not in the U.S. with our universal age of consent of 18.

Consider the pervasiveness in our culture of songs such as "Jail Bait" and "Hey Little Girl (With A High School Sweater)." Consider, also, the thousands of kids under 18 who have sex each year, whether society and/or the law sanctions it or not. Yet our laws adamantly refuse to recognize that teenagers have sexual drives. This is contrary to the kids' interests and contrary to their mental and physical health.
We deny teenagers sexual outlets. Try THAT as a definition for "child abuse."
If our courts would permit a "necessity defense," Michael Jackson could use it and win, hands down. It was obvious from his television interview that there was a consenting relationship going on, that here was a teenage boy and an older man with a genuine regard and affection for each other. In fact, here was a teenage boy whose body language clearly said "Look who I'm sleeping with, nyahh!" If that crossed the line into sexual activity, it's nobody else's business but theirs.

Gary G. Taylor * Rialto, CA
gary at donavan dot org / http:// geetee dot donavan dot org "The two most abundant things in the universe
are hydrogen and stupidity." Harlan Ellison
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
It does seem worth pointing out that children at the receiving end of sexual encounters with adults are indeed victims.

Have you ever been approached by a 14-year-old who put his hand down the front of your pants and said "I want that in me"? I have.

I don't envy you.
If I grant his request, is the kid a victim? Am I a criminal?

Yes. Yes.
At what age does a "child" become an "adult" when it comes to having sex with someone older? Most European countries have an age of consent of 16 (http://www.ageofconsent.com).

I thought about addressing this before, but I figured that no matter what I said I'd get contradicted. Let's just say that for purposes of this discussion a "child" is whatever the law says is "child." There are obvious problems no matter what definition you used. But I think few would disagree that a ten-year-old boy is a child for these purposes and that anyone legally an adult is an adult for these purposes.
At what age does a "child" become sexually functional and able to make rational decisions about his/her sexual partners? Does the law recognize this? Certainly not in the U.S. with our universal age of consent of 18.

Eighteen is the universal age of majority (adulthood) in the US but not of consent. There's actually a table of such ages at . The US appears at the bottom, state by state. Sixteen seems to be the most common age.
Consider the pervasiveness in our culture of songs such as "Jail Bait" and "Hey Little Girl (With A High School ... that teenagers have sexual drives. This is contrary to the kids' interests and contrary to their mental and physical health.

I certainly agree that it's the height of stupidity to pretend that ignoring adolescent sex accomplishes anything or that instruction in "abstinence" bears any relation to what's occurring in real life. The degree of permissiveness regarding teenage sexuality varies widely from one place in the US to another.
We deny teenagers sexual outlets. Try THAT as a definition for "child abuse."

I have so many different and conflicting thoughts about this that I don't know where to start.
If our courts would permit a "necessity defense," Michael Jackson could use it and win, hands down. It was obvious ... "Look who I'm sleeping with, nyahh!" If that crossed the line into sexual activity, it's nobody else's business but theirs.[/nq]I'm far too ignorant of the details of the Jackson case to comment on anything more than what's offered up for comment. If the case is as you say, it may well be that the law should not be interfering. But I also believe that (1) younger teens mostly lack sufficient judgment about sex to be allowed to do whatever thay want and (2) much older adults should not be able to involve these children in sexual relationships with impunity.

I don't know where the line should be drawn, and I agree that no matter where it is drawn there are going to be some ghastly results. But as far as I'm concerned, no man of forty is entitled to a sexual relationship with a boy of, say, fourteen. Same for other combinations of male and female. There have to be lines.

Bob Lieblich
No prig, but really ...
Gary G. Taylor wrote on 24 Apr 2004:
It does seem worth pointing out that children at the receiving end of sexual encounters with adults are indeed victims.

Have you ever been approached by a 14-year-old who put his hand down the front of your pants and said "I want that in me"? I have. If I grant his request, is the kid a victim? Am I a criminal?

Yes and yes, if you're older than 15 or 16. And if you're older than
18 and believe that it's okay in the post-modern-civilized world foryou to treat the come-ons of minors as reasonable and competent invitations for consensual adult sexual relationships, then you are judgmentally impaired, IMHO. Stay away from NAMBLA (that's the correct initialism, isn't it?) meetings and get real.
At what age does a "child" become an "adult" when it comes to having sex with someone older? Most European ... sexual partners? Does the law recognize this? Certainly not in the U.S. with our universal age of consent of 18.

False. In New Jersey, there is (at least there was) a sliding scale of ages of consent depending upon how old both boy and girl were (I don't think the law sanctioned homosexual sex). If a 14-year-old boy and a 13-year-old girl had consensual sex, no crime was necessarily committed, but if an 18-year-old-boy and a 13-year-old girl had sex, no matter how willing the parties or who the initiator, the boy committed statuatory rape.
Consider the pervasiveness in our culture of songs such as "Jail Bait" and "Hey Little Girl (With A High School ... society and/or the law sanctions it or not. Yet our laws adamantly refuse to recognize that teenagers have sexual drives.

Nah, it's not the laws that don't recognize this. Laws are insentient and cannot recognize anything. Lawmakers and parents don't want to recognize this in law or in any other public manner, even though they know full well that they had the same sexual desires when they were kids.
This is contrary to the kids' interests and contrary to their mental and physical health.

Civilization and its discontent dejavu all over again, eh wot?
We deny teenagers sexual outlets. Try THAT as a definition for "child abuse."

There's always "self-indulgence", as Ellen G. White like to call it, even though she believed it caused all the world's ills.
If our courts would permit a "necessity defense," Michael Jackson could use it and win, hands down. It was obvious ... "Look who I'm sleeping with, nyahh!" If that crossed the line into sexual activity, it's nobody else's business but theirs.

You'd better make damn sure you never get convicted of exercising the beliefs you've expressed here. Regardless of the validity or truth of your position, you will be quashed, squashed, and debauched (if your prisonmates can stand the idea of even touching you except to kill you) in prison. Life's a *** no matter when you die or how.

Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor.
For email, ehziuh htiw rehpycrebyc ecalper.
You'd better make damn sure you never get convicted of exercising the beliefs you've expressed here. Regardless of the validity ... squashed, and debauched (if your prisonmates can stand the idea of even touching you except to kill you) in prison

Yes, I know; I already have been. Read my web site.

Gary G. Taylor * Rialto, CA
gary at donavan dot org / http:// geetee dot donavan dot org "The two most abundant things in the universe
are hydrogen and stupidity." Harlan Ellison
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Show more