Results 16 to 18 of 18
-
11-05-2014, 04:30 PM #16
So what ? They had sexe at 15. It was common sense back then. And Physiologically it could still make sense now. That Fully sexually developed people can make sex with other "fully" sexually developed people? And don't call it rape because of law but just consented sexual intercourse.
Last edited by davidcua; 11-05-2014 at 04:30 PM.
-
11-05-2014, 05:48 PM #17
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Location
- Big Jeff's Family Restaurant, 815 Fremont Ave, South Pasadena, CA
- Posts
- 50,069
- Rep Power
- 2149335
If some 47-year-old man had sex with my 15-year-old daughter, he'd have to worry about me more than any law on the books.
Consent or no consent, that age is a baby and should be treated as such. Hands off. Pants on.
*And the same should be expected regardless of whether it's a man or woman who is the aggressor or initiator of the activity.
This woman is 47-years-old. Couldn't she be the boy's grandmother? Gtfo!Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Join Rx Muscle on Facebook!
Contact [email protected] to be interviewed!
-
11-05-2014, 06:33 PM #18
Of course she could ! Flavio briatore could be the father as well as the grand father of half his conquetes. Is it still morally wrong ? I don't think so.
Consent (full consent / no pressure) + fully sexually developed 15 year old lad => No "rape" in fact. That's just sad that the law consider it otherwise.
I'm 25 year old, and when I was 15/16 if such "occasion" would have presented to me, maybe I would have consider it. And so does a lot of 15/17 year old (fully sexually developed) men.
Bookmarks