German man castrates teenage daughter's 57-year-old boyfriend [Archive] - The Apricity Forum: A European Cultural Community

Agrippa

12-15-2010, 07:04 PM

I don't understand what you guys are cheering about. Has this guy committed a crime? If so I don't see it. The perpetrator should be given a harsh sentence.

The girl was in an age which was mature enough and that guy should have rather looked up for what his daughter did, rather than blaming the other man.

He acted like a Barbarian and was even such a wimp to come with his friends to overwhelm the other man.

This was a very cruel action and obviously, for taking away the pride and manhood of the other man, he should be punished by death or the same way (mirror punishment).

I can't see how he acted right, but I can agree with Osweo:

I don't like this idea that when a kid grows past 16 he or she is suddenly an autonomous individual, with no responsibilities or duties toward their family.

It is to blame the daughter for not obeying! If he is not ok with that, he could rather have shot them both, than castrating the guy which is such a cruel act that it is of a subhuman nature.

Also, what might he have done next, if his "horny daughter" goes to the next "lucky fellow" of older age, castrating him too?

Obviously it was the daughter's fault, she has to obey and if she doesn't, he must take the responsibility for it, but obviously not in such a subhuman way.

The age difference is of no significance anyway, because it was normal for most societies that older men married younger women, so I can't think of it being an age issue, as long as the girls hit biological maturity, which is for sure the case for most in the age of 17 - probably in some areas of the world, especially the USA people think different, but otherwise - rather not.

Or do you think I would prefer a young Negroid before an old high level Europid man for my daughter? Obviously not, that would be insane.

As long as the guy has good traits and they make up a respectable couple, who cares for the age difference anyway? And if you are not happy with the boyfriend she has, whatever age, there should be rules for the parents, especially the father, the daughter and the foreign man.

But obviously you can't act like a craven subhuman and come with your friends to castrate another free man for what your indecorous daughter does and get away with just some years in prison or something like that - not in my book and that's for sure.

Foxy

12-15-2010, 07:07 PM

Well done, it's time to clean the society.

Loki

12-15-2010, 07:11 PM

But obviously you can't act like a craven subhuman and come with your friends to castrate another free man for what your indecorous daughter does and get away with just some years in prison or something like that - not in my book and that's for sure.

That's my point, yes. Whilst the relationship looks unsavoury and would raise a few eyebrows, it is not against the law. It is worrying that so many easily call for extreme punishment. I reckon it's probably because this is just the internet and it's easy to talk. In the real world, thankfully, things don't work like that. We're not cavemen anymore.

Grumpy Cat

12-15-2010, 07:17 PM

Hey man, I'm just covering myself for 20 years from now ... :strokebeard:

LOL I knew it.

But what if it was your daughter?

Agrippa

12-15-2010, 07:19 PM

Well done, it's time to clean the society.

From what?

Craven subhumans which have no respect for other people and act like lowest level scum?

I smell anti-male, "mysandric" tendencies here, because if the guy would have been a Muslim killing his daughter in a "honour crime", which would be minimum "as justified" as that incidence, many here would have cried about the "inhumane" muslims while in this case some cheer about an European being castrating for having had sex with a girl which is beyond the child's age and not married to another man.

I think that is "a little bit" inconsequent.

Also, the whole case is not too different from this one:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6375

or this:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19933

and that:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19987

Also, to repeat it, I doubt the age issue was decisive and many fathers might think bad about their daughters boyfriends, if they all start to do horrible crimes like that, I don't have to explain where we are heading to. There must be rules and I too say that currently the parents have not enough rights if it is about their children, even more so in our current oversexualised and multicultural society, but again, this idiot just committed a horrible crime, while the other man - who is now maimed for life - was innocent before the law and would be been innocent before most laws in the world, especially if the current custom is not that the father can determien the relationships of the daughter.

What would lead, by the way, to forced marriages and the like, because IF, you must be consequent and CHANGE THE RULES, rather than doing, like an affective and cruel subhuman, what you think is right when you are drunk and sit together with your friends and fellow perpetrators...

Der Vater war vor dem Überfall zur Polizei gegangen, um die Beziehung zu seiner minderjährigen Tochter verbieten zu lassen. Ohne Erfolg. Die Beziehung sei nicht strafbar, wenn der Ältere nicht eine Notlage des Mädchens ausnutze oder sie für sexuelle Dienstleistungen bezahle, sagte der Sprecher der Staatsanwaltschaft. Dennoch hatten die Beamten die 17-Jährige vorgeladen, um die Situation zu klären. So lange wollte der Vater aber nicht warten – und schuf vollendete Tatsachen.

The police wanted even to question the guy, whether there is some kind of illegal action involved, but he didn't wait for the police action and committed that crime.

Das Strafgesetzbuch sieht dafür eine Strafe von mindestens drei Jahren vor, wenn das Opfer die Zeugungsfähigkeit einbüßt und dies vom Täter auch so beabsichtigt war. Wer seine Komplizen waren, verriet der geständige Vater jedoch nicht.

http://www.focus.de/panorama/welt/bielefeld-vater-schnitt-liebhaber-der-tochter-hoden-ab_aid_580568.html

The minimum punishment is three years, like most sentences for personal injuries ridiculously low in my opinion - like if the loss of an eye is just worth some months in prison or the like, while tax fraud, property crimes and even more so political crimes being punished harder relatively - which is - in my opinion absurd and part of our degenerated society and law system.

He didn't reveal his abetters so far - at least he seems to be loyal to which which he made criminals as well for his own cruel cause.

Foxy

12-15-2010, 07:23 PM

Wyn

12-15-2010, 07:23 PM

The girl was in an age which was mature enough and that guy should have rather looked up for what his daughter did, rather than blaming the other man.

Agreed. As they say, it takes two to tango.

He acted like a Barbarian and was even such a wimp to come with his friends to overwhelm the other man.

Agreed again. I'm not actually defending a 57 year old man who has a relationship with a 17 year old girl, but there's nothing honourable in the father's actions.

anonymaus

12-15-2010, 07:34 PM

Loki

12-15-2010, 07:37 PM

LOL I knew it.

But what if it was your daughter?

I was kidding, of course.

If it was my daughter I'd have had a serious chat with her ... and with her love interest. If he wasn't a multi-millionaire, of course. ;) Some men look good even till great age.

Agrippa

12-15-2010, 07:50 PM

@Agrippa: to clean the society from people who behave like pigs. A 57 years old man who goes with a teen would have been considered pervy until 50 years ago. I don't belive the story that love is blind. Some elders can be very manipulative. Same if it was muslim.
But not don't think about religion and judge the event for what it is.

Where?

I could name various prominent people, many of which being considered genius, heros or whathever, many times even on this forum, which ALL had relationships with girls in that age or even younger - in most of Europe the age of 14, 15, 16 or latest 17 is considered legal age for sexual activities with older man, regardless of their age.

So if you want to change that, plea to change the law, though it is unnatural to go beyond 16, because while some girls are biologically immature at that age, most are, latest with 16-19, not, so you just criminalise men for a normal behaviour, going for biologically and sexually mature women, which is unnatural and strange, wouldn't have been even considered in most societies throughout time and history.

But then again, if you think so, you have to change the law or rules in society in a human and rational way, by making up rules everyone knows and can - has to recognise.

If a girl can be sexually active and getting pregnant - being biologically rather mature, you can't consider her being a kid any more and if you don't want those girls to have sex, you have educate them that way in my opinion and have to control them as a family and society - group. If that's wanted.

But then again, I know plenty of 16 or 17 years old young mothers, some with males of their age, some with older ones, which make up normal and healthy families and that was the case throughout human history, so what's the fuzz about?

Do you prefer women at the age of 40 without children?

Also, it was not about rape, I mean not that rape would justify that sort of vigilantism necessarily, but it would make this actions much more understandable - but again, there was no sort of violence involved, the woman was of legal age in the state, presumably sexually mature and it was a consensual relationship.

Some elders can be very manipulative.

18 year old boys - probably the Turks, Arabs and Gypsies etc. which lure the girls into prostitution, aren't? All males can be "manipulative" if they want to have sex with a girl/woman and all women can play a similar game, you don't even know who started the sexual relationship in this case and how...

Obviously, I know MUCH harder cases of women being "manipulated", exploited or whatever, this should be our concern primarily, but in this case, I see nothing of that, I just see a fathers authority over his child being damaged and he acted like a craven subhuman because of that - in a way understandable, but not justifiable, especially because of the concrete brutal character of this actions.

This is NO STORY of "an exploited woman" - for sure not, because it was HER WILL to live and have sex with that guy, exactly what our current Western society and Feminism tells the females - with the father's consent or not.

So why blaming the innocent guy and even cheering about his cruel mutilation? I don't get it...

Osweo

12-15-2010, 07:53 PM

We don't know the individuals involved, and make up our own scenarios in our heads. I can imagine some scenarios where the man would deserve it.

But okay, maybe this is the other scenario of a crazy father who might generally be a bit of a nasty character himself.

I just said what I did cos I'm sick of people thinking they're immune to do what they like, as long as it's 'legal'. Perhaps I was rash to assume that this is one of the nastier cases, but it could well be. Actually, for all we know, the older man could have been a Turk. Perhaps he'd been 'grooming' the girl for some time. :shrug:

Arne

12-15-2010, 08:13 PM

It sounds like a Good Knife to cut off 2 balls !!

Some People don´t understand "our" specific Point of View.
It´s not a Sign of Humanity afterall to act barbaric.

Agrippa

12-15-2010, 08:13 PM

We don't know the individuals involved, and make up our own scenarios in our heads. I can imagine some scenarios where the man would deserve it.

Being castrated with a kitchen knife while being conscious?

Which would that be?

But I completely agree with you. While I think about the normal guy I saw which made up a family with the younger woman, bringing up good children and making a healthy impression, some might see a slimy guy waiting with some sweeties or drugs in the backyard of the next school for his next "underage victim".

Obviously we don't know all facts!

But okay, maybe this is the other scenario of a crazy father who might generally be a bit of a nasty character himself.

He surely was, because if not, he would have never ever considered to take his friends and castrate this guy with a kitchen knife while being conscious for having a relationship with his daughter.

Such things were considered criminal behaviour even in Medieval times, I might look at the case of Abelard and Abelard "did it" with his student:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Abelard

The story is not fully clear, but it seems that Héloïse loved him to the end and that the perpetrator was not really "the nice guy next door" neither, yet this was a - by far - harder case than this one, since he was the trusted teacher of the girl.

Actually I would have had more sympathy, if this father would have been alone, going to that guy and killing him in a rather humane way.

Not that I would have justified this action, for sure not, but it would have been a "more normal" behaviour, somewhat more above this "subhumaneness" he perpertrated.

I just said what I did cos I'm sick of people thinking they're immune to do what they like, as long as it's 'legal'.

Me too, I agree with that, especially because our current law is oftentimes crap and doesn't protect what should be protected, while criminalising what shouldn't be criminalised in a more healthy and better ordered society which is actually more a community - Gemeinschaft.

Perhaps I was rash to assume that this is one of the nastier cases, but it could well be. Actually, for all we know, the older man could have been a Turk. Perhaps he'd been 'grooming' the girl for some time. :shrug:

Well, then what does this have to do with age? I mean if your daughter is 30 and a 20 year old Moroccan (as an example) manipulates her into prostitution or Islam plus subjugation under his and his group's rule, what would make that any better than in the case of the 17 year old with an older guy?

People seem to look at the age issue alone, while I think that's not decisive and is rather part of the problem with the laws we have now - because they are individualised.

If you want to protect the family and bloodline, even along the lines of patria potestas - what it would mean if you say this guy's actions are not totally criminal but "understandable", then you must have a completely different law and society, not the Liberal-Individualised system we have now.

And again, the age of the daughter would be of no importance whatsoever then neither, because if a daughter, if she is 14 or 40, acts against the family and group, so does the man which has a relationship with her, the problem doesn't end when she is older than this or that age neither and it doesn't start with her being younger than 21, but the relationship being simply unwanted by the father, family and group.

But that's not the law we have and I just see a free and innocent man, being mutilated in a horrible way by a guy and his friends which acted in a subhuman way.

Osweo

12-15-2010, 08:36 PM

Sometimes I drop my guard, and the veneer of civilisation slips away and shows the true Manchester Proletarian within. ;) I was ... um, brought up to see 'law' as something you work around. :o

We don't know the details. Surely there are aspects of the situation that prompted such a drastic reaction. I can think of loads of possible things. But I am pretty savage...

As for age, in my own instinct, and wider culture, this is looked down upon. Simple as that.

Agrippa

12-15-2010, 09:21 PM

Even if we think solely about the age difference, we might have pictures in our mind like that of this classic artist, Lucas Cranach the Elder:

http://de.academic.ru/pictures/dewiki/76/Lucas_Cranach_der_Altere-Das_Ungleiche_Paar.jpg

Or indivduals like this:

http://www.seitenblicke.at/uploads/tx_userstblartikel/loddar_liliana.jpg

Again, I see a wide variation and can think of many cases in which the age is of secondary to no importance - and in the end it is the story between two people and two families, as well as a group with its laws and customs.

If someone says "50 years back this would have been considered perv", I can just answer: In some tiny regions of the world probably, in most other's rather not - but probably, at least in a certain context, like that shown by Cranach, if the attractiveness levels were SO different

looked down upon

Osweo

12-15-2010, 09:41 PM

Even if we think solely about the age difference, we might have pictures in our mind like that of this classic artist, Lucas Cranach the Elder:

http://de.academic.ru/pictures/dewiki/76/Lucas_Cranach_der_Altere-Das_Ungleiche_Paar.jpg
А популар Oops. A popular theme for artists in many periods, exactly because of the outlandishness, and very often with a moral overtone. A Russian one;
http://www.forsfortuna.com/uploads/posts/2009-02/1235737864_40.jpg

Or indivduals like this:

http://www.seitenblicke.at/uploads/tx_userstblartikel/loddar_liliana.jpg
Celebrities, Agrippa! :tsk:

My folk culture - I know a lot of old folk songs from England and Ireland, and a few from Scotland and Wales - roundly condemns these 'unequal' matches. "Never marry an old man" is a line from SO many songs. The folk wisdom is unanimous on it.

Again, I see a wide variation and can think of many cases in which the age is of secondary to no importance - and in the end it is the story between two people and two families, as well as a group with its laws and customs.
Heh, and THIS girl's family were rather unimpressed... ;)

If someone says "50 years back this would have been considered perv", I can just answer: In some tiny regions of the world probably, in most other's rather not - but probably, at least in a certain context, like that shown by Cranach, if the attractiveness levels were SO different
I can only go by my own upbringing and culture. :shrug:

Eldritch

12-16-2010, 03:34 AM

This man did what just about any other man in his position would have wanted to do.

Whether it's a good thing that he surrendered to the impulse, well, I have somewhat mixed feelings about that. :wink

Eldritch

12-16-2010, 07:41 AM

CelticTemplar

12-16-2010, 11:55 AM

A bit harsh, a nick off of the tip would have been enough.

Don

12-16-2010, 12:03 PM

The same radical difference can be seen also in Western and Islamic ideas about the family's honour: in the West the daughter is a member of the family, in Islamic countries she is salable goods.

When the family is dishonoured, in the West the father attacks the offender. In Islam, he attacks the daughter, since she is now spoiled goods that, in order to restore the family's honour, must be destroyed by "honour" murder.

Totally agree. I have pointed to these differences more that once in here.
Also the point that we have banned our honour, a valuable protection arsenal to defend our families and life style now under siege and attack.

blan

12-16-2010, 12:14 PM

all this stupid medical science researching cancer cures and aids cures... when is the bloody testicle transplant research going to come!! i mean man you only get two.

Magister Eckhart

12-16-2010, 03:46 PM

This case illustrates the most fundamental difference between Western and Islamic cultures.

In the West, fathers don't like their daughters to be in relationships with men triple their own age; whereas in Islamic countries it is customary to marry off your daughters to men of that age.

The same radical difference can be seen also in Western and Islamic ideas about the family's honour: in the West the daughter is a member of the family, in Islamic countries she is salable goods.

When the family is dishonoured, in the West the father attacks the offender. In Islam, he attacks the daughter, since she is now spoiled goods that, in order to restore the family's honour, must be destroyed by "honour" murder.

And which of the two are we? Which is this German man? I'd say that closes debate on this whole thing for anyone who believes in the existence of Western culture.

anonymaus

12-16-2010, 04:39 PM

This case illustrates the most fundamental difference between Western and Islamic cultures.

When the family is dishonoured, in the West the father attacks the offender. In Islam, he attacks the daughter, since she is now spoiled goods that, in order to restore the family's honour, must be destroyed by "honour" murder.

In the West, the father breaks a law which is civil and peaceful to achieve a visceral, vengeful, satisfaction for an outrage perceived only by himself; in the process he violates the rights of a law-abiding man, abdicates his responsibility to provide for his family--he will surely be jailed for many years--and undoubtedly does psycho-emotional damage to his daughter who, at the age which most people begin attending university, must seek parental approval for her intimate relationships or risk exposing her lovers to barbaric violence.

Seems reasonable to me!

Eldritch

12-16-2010, 04:43 PM

And which of the two are we? Which is this German man? I'd say that closes debate on this whole thing for anyone who believes in the existence of Western culture.

I believe that the point that the Ironmistress was trying to make was that under Islam, instead of castrating the man, the father would have started to haggle over the number of camels/goats he wants for his daughter.

Pallantides

12-16-2010, 04:46 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bride_price

If it was my daughter and he was a of good stock(progressive Northern European ;P) and treated her fairly, I'd let her marry him(some bride money would be nice) age would not be a problem as long as he is not infertile.

poiuytrewq0987

12-16-2010, 05:23 PM

If she was my daughter, I don't think I would've castrated him but rather beat the guy to a bloody pulp even moreso if the guy was taking advantage of my daughter.

Pallantides

12-16-2010, 05:36 PM

la bombe

12-16-2010, 05:57 PM

One of my best friends is 23 and has a 60-something boyfriend. They started dating when she was 19 or 20. I personally don't understand it, but I sure as hell don't support chopping anyone's balls off for it either.

The girl was probably with the man because she has daddy issues anyway, her father sounds more than a little nuts.

The Lawspeaker

12-16-2010, 06:22 PM

Hakkie takkie weg zakkie ! :D:thumb001:

I am not sure what I would have done with such a guy but good on the father. I probably would not have castrated him but have beaten the living daylight out of him.

Bloodeagle

12-16-2010, 07:01 PM

I believe that the punishment did not fit the crime!
This seems a more fitting punishment for a rapist.

I think that this mans pride and honor was questioned by his daughters actions, this led the man to carry out a rather extreme form of vengeance, emasculating his enemy!

I predict that this will give him comfort while serving the rest of his days in a prison cell. ;)

Óttar

12-16-2010, 07:39 PM

The father deserves a severe punishment. Castration is akin to murder.

blan

12-16-2010, 09:35 PM

The father deserves a severe punishment. Castration is akin to murder.

i see where the father is coming from and i would not want my child with a old man and would react in anger as well, but his actions were to extreme in this situation this is something that should be done to child molesting rapist killers, this guy went overboard

Osweo

12-16-2010, 09:37 PM

Dedicated to any and all who support vigilantism:

"What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ... And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you - where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's, and if you cut them down -- and you're just the man to do it -- do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!" --Sir Thomas More, A Man for All Seasons
And we all know what happened to More!

(Or rather, many of us have seen the film of that play.. ;) )
Didn't his enemies bump him off, while simultaniously relying on some legal nicety that he himself had drawn up? Like I said before, the Law is something to use creatively, not simply obey. ;)

under Islam, instead of castrating the man, the father would have started to haggle over the number of camels/goats he wants for his daughter.
No, more likely he'd be haggling down at the petrol station, to get a good deal on the cannister of gasoline and the box of matches he would use to sort her out. :....

modern western cultures, in my great grandmothers day it was not unheard of for 15 or 16 year old girl to get married to a man twice her age, as long as he was well established or had a good job, for a girl it was always favorable to marry up the social ladder.
This guy was more like three times hers. ;)

Murphy

12-16-2010, 10:15 PM

The castration is a little too much. A good beating would have done for the fellow.

poiuytrewq0987

12-16-2010, 10:53 PM

i see where the father is coming from and i would not want my child with a old man and would react in anger as well, but his actions were to extreme in this situation this is something that should be done to child molesting rapist killers, this guy went overboard

Yes but what did you expect from a country of barbarians after all?

blan

12-16-2010, 10:59 PM

Yes but what did you expect from a country of barbarians after all?

i think he got this violent mindset from his russian heritage more than his German

Falkata

12-16-2010, 11:02 PM

I think the man is frustrated since after all his beloved daughter is a little whore. He failed as a father

The Journeyman

12-16-2010, 11:56 PM

I think the father got jealous and couldn't handle his daughter finding a new daddy. :wink In other words, he had an inappropriate fixation with his daughter.

Magister Eckhart

12-17-2010, 01:09 AM

modern western cultures, in my great grandmothers day it was not unheard of for 15 or 16 year old girl to get married to a man twice her age, as long as he was well established or had a good job, for a girl it was always favorable to marry up the social ladder.

We're not talking marriage here. In your great grandmother's day, people still had parties to introduce young ladies to society, and they were expected to keep to their families before that.

This case has absolutely nothing in common with the cases of marriage fifty to sixty years ago. The old lecher who lost his balls was practically a paedophile (actually if she were just four years younger he would fit the psychological profile for paedophilia.) How is everyone missing this? There was no marriage involved here -- we're talking about typical modern dating: lots of sex, no commitment.

I wish I could read in the news about more lecherous old men and paedophiles getting castrated violently.

la bombe

12-17-2010, 02:11 AM

The old lecher who lost his balls was practically a paedophile (actually if she were just four years younger he would fit the psychological profile for paedophilia.)

Being sexually attracted to a 17 year old does NOT make you 'practically a pedophile'. He may or may not be a creep, but comparing his actions to pedophilia is seriously unfair.

Murphy

12-17-2010, 02:42 AM

Ephebophilia.

Guapo

12-17-2010, 02:50 AM

If it was a 17 year old guy and a 57 year old woman, the dude would get a high five from his daddy.

Óttar

12-17-2010, 02:54 AM

I think the father got jealous and couldn't handle his daughter finding a new daddy. :wink In other words, he had an inappropriate fixation with his daughter.
Seriously. I sure am glad I never had to deal with a girl who had a father around. It's like, yo pops, I'm the one courting her, not you. :cool:

SwordoftheVistula

12-17-2010, 05:22 AM

This guy is awesome! Permanently fixes the bad situation his daughter was in, and refuses to rat out those who helped him.

i think he got this violent mindset from his russian heritage more than his German

Untrue! This is good old school True German, of the type which is preserved in outlying areas such as Russia, what we see in modern Germany today is the dysgenic remnants of two world wars and two centuries of emigration. Where do ya think the term 'gettin medieval' comes from :thumb001:

In the West, the father breaks a law which is civil and peaceful to achieve a visceral, vengeful, satisfaction for an outrage perceived only by himself; in the process he violates the rights of a law-abiding man, abdicates his responsibility to provide for his family--he will surely be jailed for many years--and undoubtedly does psycho-emotional damage to his daughter who, at the age which most people begin attending university, must seek parental approval for her intimate relationships or risk exposing her lovers to barbaric violence.

Seems to me a problem with 'the law'

Agrippa

12-17-2010, 02:45 PM

The Ironmistress (http://takkirauta.blogspot.com/) has blogged about this case quite insightfully (http://takkirauta.blogspot.com/2010/12/poikakaverilta-pallit-pois.html) (in Finnish only, nyah nyah, but I'll attempt a quick summary):

This case illustrates the most fundamental difference between Western and Islamic cultures.

In the West, fathers don't like their daughters to be in relationships with men triple their own age; whereas in Islamic countries it is customary to marry off your daughters to men of that age.

The same radical difference can be seen also in Western and Islamic ideas about the family's honour: in the West the daughter is a member of the family, in Islamic countries she is salable goods.

When the family is dishonoured, in the West the father attacks the offender. In Islam, he attacks the daughter, since she is now spoiled goods that, in order to restore the family's honour, must be destroyed by "honour" murder.

This difference between "West" and "Islamic" can be clearly deduced to the Christian and Feudal times already, when the clan structures and traditional tribal customs were finally destroyed.

But even then this "Western custom" was primarily for those which had to follow the church rules and lords rules, whether they wanted or not.

In fact, the Aristocracy had a different marriage pattern throughout time, so had the European ancestors.

I might point to this thread of mine:
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12370

Also, I would never recommend a good girl before her 25th birthday to marry an average 60 year old guy, don't get me wrong on that.

BUT I do think that it is no problem and can produce good offspring and results as well, being nothing criminal of any sort and hardly something which deserves such a subhuman cruelty.

THAT's a huge difference! Whether I would want my daughter to marry a guy of that age while being a teen? Obviously not, unless this guy is an aged superhuman with a lot of good traits biologically, memetically to materially.

Because obviously, what really matters both for the woman and family is quality, and I might add that some old guys have more of it than many young ones, but as obvious is, if a woman has the choice between otherwise largely equal men - one young, the other one aged, she would be stupid to strange to choose the latter.

But as stupid would be the old guy if having the chance for successful procreation and a good relationship with a younger woman if denying her "access".

And since this is no crime nor a moral problem in any case, what this father did is not excusable by ANY STANDARDS!
Even on the contrary!

The only excuse would be the patriarchal position of the father, which has to full rights over his women and children, but oh, I forgot, that's something Europeans absolished too - again at least for the common citizens early in Medieval Times, together with the classic-traditional marriage pattern - again something active in Islamic cultures though by the way...

This patriarchal excuse doesn't justify such cruel actions against an innocent free man neither though.

When the family is dishonoured, in the West the father attacks the offender. In Islam, he attacks the daughter, since she is now spoiled goods that, in order to restore the family's honour, must be destroyed by "honour" murder.

Which is far more rational though, at least if there was no violence or force of any sort involved - because guilty is always the person which breaks the rule primarily - in this case the family rules and honour, the rule of the patrarch.

If your woman cheats on you, who is responsible, the foreign man or your woman? Obviously the woman!

So to attack the man is in this case also madness, UNLESS the man:
- Knew that the woman was married to you and you definitely didn't allowed it
- Even worse if the man is related or befriended, because then BOTH the woman and the man cheated on you

I think of it being almost idiotic but typical for the "Western profile" if a man charged the other man before his woman if he finds her cheating, that is, to say it blunt, idiotic, because primarily responsible is always the person which cheated on you - even worse consciously.

To talk of an "offender" is in this case nonsense anyway, because as far as I know, the man didn't use any sort of force and the daughter was in a censensual relationship SHE had chosen!

modern western cultures, in my great grandmothers day it was not unheard of for 15 or 16 year old girl to get married to a man twice her age, as long as he was well established or had a good job, for a girl it was always favorable to marry up the social ladder.

That's true, interestingly even in the US. Sometimes I get the feeling that many people have an image of "the past" which was rather transported by Hollywood than by reality and historical facts.

I predict that this will give him comfort while serving the rest of his days in a prison cell.

Or not, you never know. With two friends against one guy everyone can be "bold" even in this cruel and suhumane way...

The father deserves a severe punishment. Castration is akin to murder.

Right, as I said, he should get the choice between the death penalty or being castrated the same way.

Mirror punishment was old custom - eye for an eye - in many societies. Again, in this case Islamic law would be preferable...

Like I said before, the Law is something to use creatively, not simply obey.

Actually I don't care for the written law as much as the sense of it and that people understand the rules and try to act in a reasonable way, adjusted to what the community needs.

Since this innocent guy broke no rule - and many others do the same with no damage for themselves or others, this actions of the mad father can't be justified by any reasonable standards.

Do you really want to have such mad and cruel subhumans being cheered and made a new standard? I hope not...

This guy was more like three times hers

That is of no importance. Because the relative age difference is no issue for the law or any reasonable rule, only the absolute age, the biological-sexual maturity has to be.

Once a person hits the sexual maturity and is sexually active, it is up to this person and if there are reasonable rules the family to, with which people this person has sexual intercourse with.

But then again, that is primarily something IN THE FAMILY - if you can't keep your daughter chaste, it is primarily your family's fault and your daughters, which acts like a bitch, unless the older man in question has a position of trust in the family, which he severely and inexcusably abused against their will - then PROBABLY you can blame it on a similar level as the daughter or even more so in very extreme cases, otherwise for sure not.

The castration is a little too much. A good beating would have done for the fellow.

Obviously while I don't think that this would be just neither, I wouldn't lament as much about such actions, which seem to be more appropriate and less cruel as well as subhuman.

Actually I think this is a good case of what a subhuman really is: A criminal which doesn't deserve being recognised and treated like a human any more, nothing else, nothing to do with racial issues primarily...

i think he got this violent mindset from his russian heritage more than his German

That is for sure, you have to look at how often partisans and even regular soldiers mutilated French (Napoleonic) or German (1st and especially 2nd World War) soldiers which were taken prisoner of war. Really horrible things, castrating, pulling the eyeballs out, cutting up the belly and the like.

Again similar to customs we might know from the Algerian war as well and of course in many Islamic countries...

I can really imagining 3 drunken guys on their way to the unsuspecting, helpless and innocent men, having no humane feeling of any sort and doing what they did, acting like animals...

I think the man is frustrated since after all his beloved daughter is a little whore. He failed as a father

Exactly. He can't blame others for the situation in his family and the behaviour of his daughter - other than society as a whole probably, since we raise "little whores" in certain social strata at least, on a regular basis and one has just to look at the popculture to know why...

We're not talking marriage here. In your great grandmother's day, people still had parties to introduce young ladies to society, and they were expected to keep to their families before that.

This case has absolutely nothing in common with the cases of marriage fifty to sixty years ago.

Because?

I just see people don't marry out of nothing these days, neither do people of the same age, nor those of different age. So what has this to do with the fact that people of difference age classes had quite often relationships in the past, which disproves the idea of "older guys being seen as perv" - at least in a way which would fit into that case' profile!

You know what's the different between now and 100 years ago? Then many of such marriages were forced, whereas this was a consensual relationship!

The old lecher who lost his balls was practically a paedophile (actually if she were just four years younger he would fit the psychological profile for paedophilia.) How is everyone missing this?

A girl at the age of 17 is no child any more, but sexually mature. So this has nothing to do with paedophilia at all, unless you deal with the strange and Christian-sect inspired law of the US of A.

I mean in the US of A people got problems if being 25 and having a relationship with a girl at the age of 20 at times even. Can it get more stupid?

As I said, the only reasonable approach for the law & rule is always to determine the age of sexual maturity - now there are only choices between 14 and 18 - individually girls might be sexually mature between that age, but as a rule ot thumb, with 17 they mature already.

If you look at real paedophiles, they always look more specifically for immature and childish features, which I doubt this girl had.

That is the standard development of an Europid woman, again, the exact age might vary and secular acceleration led to an even earlier sexual maturation, but the stages stay the same:
http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/7733/wachstum2.png (http://img842.imageshack.us/i/wachstum2.png/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Once a female hits the biological "adult status", you can't speak of any sort of paedophilia any more.

True paedophiles always go for the immature stages - like presented here to the age of 15. Again, some might be more mature with 13, others just with 16, but 17 is pretty late and it is highly unlikely to almost impossible that this girl was in any way really childlike and immature in a sense relevant for paedophilia.

You can say it is against the law, because you made up "that custom" for whatever reason, more or less reasonable, but from a psychological point of view, it is nonsense to talk about "paedophilia" then, because being attracted to a female with the adult attributes is perfectly normal and everything else is abnormal - that doesn't mean you "have to" approach them of course, that's something different and depends on social customs, as explained.

Ibericus

12-17-2010, 03:08 PM

Age consent in Europe :

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/europe-age-of-consent.jpg

Agrippa

12-17-2010, 03:17 PM

Age consent in Europe :

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/europe-age-of-consent.jpg

Quite funny that exactly Turkey
http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/europe-age-of-consent.jpg

has an absurdly high age of consent (18) in Europe, while trying to look "more European than the Europeans", while in reality there are more underage marriages (even for other country's standards) there....

Somewhere between 14 and 16, this can be discussed, probably rather 16 if the male is beyond 21, is reasonable in my opinion, everything else superfluous and unnatural nonsense which contradicts biological reality.

lei.talk

12-17-2010, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by Iberia http://www.theapricity.com/forum/images/kiddo/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=314978#post314978) Age consent in Europe:

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/europe-age-of-consent.jpg
as your image is not showing,
click-on the images in this post (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=214793#post214793) for details.
*

Inese

12-17-2010, 06:24 PM

A very good solution of the father:thumb001: ---- the most perverse people out in the world are often older aged men!

Agrippa

12-17-2010, 06:45 PM

A very good solution of the father:thumb001: ---- the most perverse people out in the world are often older aged men!

Who is more perverted, a man who wants to have a sexual relationship with a young woman in her best years or the young woman which approaches the old man?

I think neither necessarily, but for sure the young woman more so than the older guy. Or can't she think for herself? Then she must be under disability at the age of 17, which is no child any more.

Then think again about what this subhumans did to this guy and how this can be justified, if he did no crime, used no violence, no force and was in no way a criminal or immoral offender from what we know so far.

Also what's that for a sentence:

the most perverse people out in the world are often older aged men!

Women and younger men even more so can't act in a perverted manner?

Or what?

Again, I smell the anti-male tendency which the mass media spreads day by day in the West anyway. We can see where it led us, namely into lowest rate birthrates and our people's extinction, a feminised and helpless society being overrun by foreigners and exploited by a corrupted clique.

But oh well, the bad, bad men are responsible for everything and if a guy has a sexual relationship with a young woman, it is more perverted than cutting ones genitals off, even while the victim is conscious, with a simple kitchen knife, while being hold by two criminal friends... :rolleyes:

Some people need to re-think what "perversion" is about I guess. For sure not about men, regardless of age, trying to find a fertile and sexually mature partner for sexual intercourse and procreation, I can think of many other "more perverted" things, like this incidence in particular.

Nglund

12-17-2010, 06:55 PM

What this man did is utterly sadistic, I wouldn't even do that to my worst enemy...

The Lawspeaker

12-17-2010, 07:01 PM

What this man did is utterly sadistic, I wouldn't even do that to my worst enemy...
Ooh I would :D
Just to make sure that my sons wouldn't have to face his sons in the future ^^

Civis vs worst enemy= 1-0 No rematch possible.

Agrippa

12-17-2010, 07:06 PM

What this man did is utterly sadistic, I wouldn't even do that to my worst enemy...

You are no subhuman of course, this guy is one.

As for those which still defend him, would you want to live beside such brutal prick? Would you give him your child to look after? Or helping your mother?

Do you really think that makes him a "honourable and decent man you can trust"?

People which are able to do such things, even worse in a fast, affective and crude manner, are the very same people which rape and mutilate other people at other occasions as well.

Because they have no empathy, no sense for right and wrong, no compassion for the other human being.

Even if you want to kill somebody, there are worse things to do. If you mutilate someone, man or woman, in such or a similar manner, there must be a sadist tendency which is hard to control - I can think of only one reason to do such cruel things: If this person did the same or even worse!

Otherwise: Never. There is no other justification.

There was a time such punishments were used on a regular basis, do I need to explain where it led us? Mass torture, brutal killings of guilty and innocent people alike, methods were used to prolong the human suffering, even for smaller and smaller delicts.

Even if I would think this guy was a criminal, what he wasn't, by any reasonable standard he is an innocent man and victim of a crime, I wouldn't think of such punishments - as I said, there is only one case where I would CONSIDER it, mirror punishment, if the perpetrator did the same to his victim and there can be no doubt about it.

Which would, in this case, mean the criminal father is the next in the row if we would come back to such a "law", which is, like I pointed out, even if individual cases make it appealing, a dangerous thing...

Ooh I would :D
Just to make sure that my sons wouldn't have to face his sons in the future ^^

Civis vs worst enemy= 1-0 No rematch possible.

I'm absolutely serious now: I for myself consider it being more just and humane to kill another person if that's justified rather than mutilating it in such a brutal manner, which is no decent behaviour in any case.

I'm now thinking about a Byzantine mother, blinding and cutting off the nose of her son, for not becoming the next Emperor and not making trouble to her rule - or the castrated and blinded Hungarian, Bulgarian and Byzantine aristocrats - in a row at that time, in Medieval times.

Same for Lombards - some of those crippled aristocrats came back and took their revence even, but again, if you begin that path, you end up in an inhumane and awful place which is more like hell than Earth.

Be careful about your wishes in this regard, I'm saying that to everybody. There were times in which this was "more normal" - to be very cruel, to torture and mutilate, prolong the agony for days and the like, do we really want that?

I don't!

I'm actually happy - even if there are individual cases in which it might be appealing to use it - that we don't use such measures on a regular basis, this was a real progress which shouldn't be endangered by cheap emotions.

Some doors are easier to open than to close, and once the gates of hell are opened again...

http://www.die-schmitts.de/Cache/Vlpfaehl.jpg

http://www.physiologus.de/bilder/pfaehlen.jpg

http://www.viennatouristguide.at/Altstadt/Mittelalter/Teil_02/ma2teil07.jpg

http://www.bessarabia.altervista.org/deu/2deutsche_in_russland/04_17jahrhundert/peter_der_grosse/images/16/raedern.jpg

http://www.pictokon.net/bilder/2007-10-bilder/24-mittelalter-strafen-strfvollzug-enthaupten-blenden-verbrennen-usw.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/Folter_mit_Hunden,_1548.jpg

http://www.hexen-forum.de/images/hexenverbrennung02.jpg

blan

12-17-2010, 07:16 PM

A very good solution of the father:thumb001: ---- the most perverse people out in the world are often older aged men!

you can say that again :thumbs up:thumbs up:thumbs up sooooo what are you wearing???

Breedingvariety

12-17-2010, 07:17 PM

Mass media mind programs people to behave promiscuously and have uncommitted sex. At the same time it programs such behavior is perverted and anti- social. I wonder what the rationale behind the contradiction is.

The Lawspeaker

12-17-2010, 07:19 PM

you can say that again :thumbs up:thumbs up:thumbs up sooooo what are you wearing???

Chaps like him make me understand the father's point of view....

Inese

12-17-2010, 07:27 PM

Who is more perverted, a man who wants to have a sexual relationship with a young woman in her best years or the young woman which approaches the old man?
Maybe both but when she has a psychical problem that the old man abuses then it is the full right of the father to help his daughter and punish the perverse man!!

Also what's that for a sentence:

the most perverse people out in the world are often older aged men!

Women and younger men even more so can't act in a perverted manner?
No but the percentage of older men who are perverse is much higher than with younger people, you can believe me that!

Again, I smell the anti-male tendency which the mass media spreads day by day in the West anyway.
Anti male by mass media?? No no Aggripa, surely not!! I speak of EXPERIENCE and situation i have seen with my own eyes! You know, i had to work in a low job for some time and you can not believe how many older men want the extremest and most perverse stuff and things. They are family fathers and grandfathers , they have a good job, a house and a big car ---- they look normal and smug but their mind is often absolut corupt! I tell you no lies when i say that the most bad and dangerous people i have ever met in my life were older man above 40 and older. These are the really dangerous people and you must sort out and rate the risk every single second in their presence!! Yes young men can be total jerks and fools but they are not corrupted. You can read from the outside that they are total jerks but harmless. But older men with a good job and everything: You cant see the bottomless pit inside their souls until they want something from you and tell you about it like it is a wish for a butter bread

But oh well, the bad, bad men are responsible for everything and if a guy has a sexual relationship with a young woman, it is more perverted than cutting ones genitals off, even while the victim is conscious, with a simple kitchen knife, while being hold by two criminal friends... :rolleyes:
Old men who do things like this abuse bad and worring situations of younger people and that makes them despiceable and i cry no tears for such assholes, they deserve no pity :rolleyes2:

Some people need to re-think what "perversion" is about I guess.
You dont know what the perversion is which i am talking about. You can hardly imagine it and thats for sure! But i say okay, live your life and believe the sweet dream that all older men are integer and fully sane. It is a bubble of ignorance!! You life in a glas house. Yes you are older than me but i am sure i have seen more filth in the character of people than you will ever see. The world is a mental asylum and there are only hard and low cases of insanity and older people tend to be more on the hard case side. Prejudice?? No, important KNOWLEDGE!

Gamera

12-17-2010, 07:47 PM

Wow, well, of course everyone would think of doing the same in the case of the father, but how we say it here, "con la cabeza caliente". Not after thinking it through, IMO. This man surrended to his impulse.

Keep in mind we don't know absolutely anything about neither of the people involved in this, neither do we know the intentions of the older man. Ok, 40 years is a lot of difference and it sure brings the balance to the "bad intentioned old perv" side. But there are always exceptions.

Quite of a complex situation. I surely can't blame the father for what he did either, though.

blan

12-17-2010, 07:52 PM

Chaps like him make me understand the father's point of view....

seriously get a sense of humor

Agrippa

12-17-2010, 07:59 PM

Maybe both but when she has a psychical problem that the old man abuses then it is the full right of the father to help his daughter and punish the perverse man!!

As I said:

can't she think for herself? Then she must be under disability at the age of 17, which is no child any more.

For the rest: What does that have to do with age? Do you think a 70 year old woman can't be abused and exploited? If its a con artist and marriage swindler, than it is a crime, otherwise it might be "not moral", but is no crime for sure and even more sure is, that the actions of this subhuman are in no relation to any possible offense of this man.

Yet you cheered about this wimp which crippled a helpless and innocent men with his 2 friends as if he is a hero, is that normal?

No but the percentage of older men who are perverse is much higher than with younger people, you can believe me that!

What is perverse? Define me "perverse".

Anti male by mass media?? No no Aggripa, surely not!! I speak of EXPERIENCE and situation i have seen with my own eyes! You know, i had to work in a low job for some time and you can not believe how many older men want the extremest and most perverse stuff and things. They are family fathers and grandfathers , they have a good job, a house and a big car ---- they look normal and smug but their mind is often absolut corupt! I tell you no lies when i say that the most bad and dangerous people i have ever met in my life were older man above 40 and older. These are the really dangerous people and you must sort out and rate the risk every single second in their presence!!

I think you exaggerate things here because of possible bad experiences you made. And after all, it seems you got away with it, had no serious problems, were able to deal with them.

If they make an offence, use violence and force, it is a crime anyway, which should be persecuted and punished by the group, rules and law, but here we talk about a consensual relationship between two people which can think for themselves and even if the father being given the right to intervene, surely by no humane and reasonable standards IN THAT WAY!

Yes young men can be total jerks and clowns but they are not corrupted. You can read from the outside that they are total jerks but harmless. But older men with a good job and everything: You cant see the bottomless pit inside their souls until they want something from you and tell you about it like it is a wish for a butter bread

I tell you the real difference: The old guys don't care any more, so they tell you what they think and don't give a shit. Of course they have many experiences and ideas younger males don't have, that's clear too. The young men might hide this or that, you will probably never know, because they don't tell.

That is why women are biologically programmed to control male partners for their traits, in many respects.

That's part of our biological programs and sexuality, nothing you should wonder about.

Of course, our current society produces many perversions, but probably you are more sensitive than others, I don't know where YOU draw the line. And just because a man, regardless of age, wants to have sex with a sexually attractive, sexually mature female, he is surely not a "perv" - if he wants to have sex with little girls before maturity, boys, dogs or dead bodies or the like, THAT'S PERVERTED!

Old men who do things like this

Like this? What did he do? He had a consensual sexual relationship with a sexually mature person!

abuse bad and worring situations of younger people

Probably he had a bad worrying situation too! Probably the girl just wanted his help, his money and protection from her insane father?

Do you think older people can't have bad and worrying situations? Again, where is the difference?

If you don't know how those two people were living together, had sex with each other and the like, how can you dare to judge the man that way?!

How can you say HE did exploit her?

You seem to see the whole situation from a very subjective point of view, as if you or a friend of your's being the victim of "some comic book old perv", yet you don't know that case and still cheer about the victim being mutiliated in a mad and awful manner?

and that makes them despiceable and i cry no tears for such assholes, they deserve no pity :rolleyes2:

That's like men saying: If a young girl goes into a "bad club", she deserves being raped, infected with diseases, probably even her breasts chopped off or genitals mutilated, after all, she acted like a bitch and deserves no pity... :rolleyes2:

Would that make you happy?

And believe ME, there are enough people, especially in some areas, which might think that way too.

Would that please you?

Me not, neither do I feel great about this insane incidence in Germany!

You dont know what the perversion is which i am talking about. You can hardly imagine it and thats for sure! But i say okay, live your life and believe the sweet dream that all older men are integer and fully sane.

I wasn't speaking of all older men, I was talking about this concrete case. A normal sexual relationship between two adult people and the father mutilating and torturing the innocent man for nothing, like a wimp with his two friends.

I'm talking about this case, not any other. I can think of other cases in which I would blame the "old men" for sure and would punish them too, but this is no such case it seems, so why do you cheer about it?

Because you "hate all old men"?

It is a bubble of ignorance!!

It is ignorant to trivialise such cases and mix up things which you saw and exprienced probably with something you don't know and can't properly judge.

Also your degree of hate and lack of empathy towards this man is astonishing.

You life in a glas house. Yes you are older than me but i am sure i have seen more filth in the character of people you will ever see. The world is a mental asylum and there are only hard and low cases of insanity, and older people tend to be more on the hard case side.

You get old too, believe me that - unless you die young of course.

And I don't think most people get better with age, neither physically nor psychologically, only experience can be sometimes helpful, but even that can be a downgrade rather in some cases, because it always depends on the experiences you make and have to make.

But then again, what has this to do with the case in question? If you say it is good that this innocent man was mutilated that way, you are no better than "the perv's" you talk about, because in both cases, the bad thing is not what you want and desire probably, but what you are ready to do to other people, how far you would go and how much you would hurt them for your desires, without empathy and respect for other persons.

If you desire revenge, you would even go so far and cut off an innocent older male's genitals while he is conscious with a kitchen knife, just because you have a "bad feeling about older men"...?

Do you think that's healthy?

Don't get me wrong, think about that twice and also think about whether such an attitude towards males will help you in life. Just try to make your way and help those you love, try to change society to the better, but don't breed hate in yourself or trivialise experiences to a degree which makes no sense any more...

The Lawspeaker

12-17-2010, 08:30 PM

seriously get a sense of humor

Says the guy that feels constantly attacked when someone takes the piss.

Osweo

12-17-2010, 08:36 PM

As for those which still defend him, would you want to live beside such brutal prick? Would you give him your child to look after? Or helping your mother?

Do you really think that makes him a "honourable and decent man you can trust"?

Hmm, you think I don't know people who would do similar? I have acquaintances who have done things in the same vein. Not quite so bad, but I don't know that they wouldn't in such a situation. Such acquaintances have their uses, even. Some of them I do trust, and would go to for assistance if I was in a very bad situation that required a certain response.

The father probably does need issuing with some sort of identifying mark to tell others 'Not to Fuck with him';
http://photos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs154.snc3/18155_722412302998_20700324_41809743_2195915_n.jpg
:whistle:

Agrippa

12-17-2010, 08:56 PM

Hmm, you think I don't know people who would do similar? I have acquaintances who have done things in the same vein. Not quite so bad, but I don't know that they wouldn't in such a situation. Such acquaintances have their uses, even. Some of them I do trust, and would go to for assistance if I was in a very bad situation that required a certain response.

I think you sum it up quite well, they are like dogs and should be treated as such. They might be useful, but only if being disciplined and led by higher standard people, otherwise they can easily degenerate into a sort of social scum which causes troubles only and one might even question whether such kind of people are of use in a better future society any more.

But for sure is, they are closer to the status of someone non compos mentis, than this man which became a victim and the girl involved alike it seems.

Such people need to know that there are greater powers which will react appropriately if they can't control themselves and that they are to be unleashed only if the necessity is there for the greater good.

Óttar

12-17-2010, 09:02 PM

So to attack the man is in this case also madness, UNLESS the man:
- Knew that the woman was married to you and you definitely didn't allowed it
- Even worse if the man is related or befriended, because then BOTH the woman and the man cheated on you
I never understand why a cheated on man goes after the guy when catching the two of them in flagrante derelicta. It's the woman's fault. Tell the guy to get the f_ck out, and then deal with the b_tch. A woman always has the upper hand with sexuality, and a woman who abuses this power should be considered a psychological and emotional terrorist and dealt with accordingly. A man who has an affair on his wife without her permission should also be dealt with, so I don't want to hear any accusations of sexism.

Magister Eckhart

12-17-2010, 09:49 PM

If it was a 17 year old guy and a 57 year old woman, the dude would get a high five from his daddy.

And I'd still say the 57 year old woman had a major psychological problem, and the kid isn't clean in the head either.

Also you're really projecting a lot on this father for the sheer sake of asserting some half-baked idea about gender inequality.

SwordoftheVistula

12-18-2010, 06:30 AM

...a feminised and helpless society being overrun by foreigners and exploited by a corrupted clique...

Well luckily, you have people like this dude, hardly 'feminized' or the type to consider himself 'helpless', to set things right

Such people need to know that there are greater powers which will react appropriately if they can't control themselves

Such applies to this 57 yr old man

As for those which still defend him, would you want to live beside such brutal prick? Would you give him your child to look after? Or helping your mother?

Absolutely! Much more so than the many pansies which inhabit modern western Europe, and can even be found in large quantity in parts of this hemisphere. They'd probably fork over the kid to the first person who shows up with a BB gun.

Be careful about your wishes in this regard, I'm saying that to everybody. There were times in which this was "more normal"

Oh you mean...before the PLUTOCRATS took over? Weren't you praising these days not too long ago?

lei.talk

12-18-2010, 09:00 AM

she needs her father's permission?
she is his chattel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chattel_marriage)?

modern western cultures, in my great grandmothers day it was not unheard of for 15 or 16 year old girl to get married to a man twice her age, as long as he was well established or had a good job, for a girl it was always favorable to marry up the social ladder.
it is the natural order (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=177590post177590) of things:
http://i53.tinypic.com/200coxg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Peach)

Agrippa

12-18-2010, 09:09 AM

Oh you mean...before the PLUTOCRATS took over? Weren't you praising these days not too long ago?

I never said everything was better in the more distant past, I just say that currently the Plutocracy makes things worse, because the good things we have, we could have otherwise too, but it is much harder to get rid of the bad things in a Plutocracy...

Brynhild

12-18-2010, 10:33 AM

I have a 16 year old daughter. The majority of girls her age would never dream of going with a man that old (and thankfully, neither would she). I would be really upset if she did and cry predator. Hypothetically, if I were to ever interfere with her choices like that, it would be an awfully long time before she spoke to me again. It is no parent's right to take such matters into their hands when it involves a young adult who can think and act for themselves. I really don't think he's playing with a full deck of cards myself by choosing somebody that young but society can't necessarily dictate who people choose. Since this was apparently a consensual situation, I think castration was harsh. The question would also be why she chose to be with someone that much older. Given her father's actions, I would think his mind was already somewhat unhinged in regards to his daughter. There may have been a difficult relationship between them already and she sought a substitute. :shrug: I can only surmise, like we all can. In any case, this young woman has lost two men in one fell swoop. If she was already psychologically damaged, this may tip her over the edge.

Belenus

04-09-2011, 02:21 PM

I'm not a father, but if I was I doubt I'd tolerate warped shit like this either. Castration is a pretty radical way to deal with the problem, but I think cases like this, where people take the law into their own hands, reflects the inadequacy of legal institutions. Europe particularly doesn't seem to deal all that harshly with sexual offenders, and this instance is just barely shy of pedophilia if you ask me. We should have a lot less tolerance for sick minds who prey on young people.

Hess

04-09-2011, 03:07 PM

Aramis

04-09-2011, 03:20 PM

The father should have his balls cut off as well. No more children for such a lowlife who seems terribly overwhelmed by raising just one daughter.

Precaution is better than cure.

Blossom

04-09-2011, 03:39 PM

Wow...a 57 years old ''boyfriend''...:eek: what's wrong with normal hormones, girls? I'm not insulting no one older than me here, ofc, but...still at some age you need to look on your own pot, please. But maybe the man wasnt the badass, maybe the 'psycho girl' was the perverted one which wanted so bad to own a oldie wrinkled ass than her friends...(again, do not understand this as an insult to any of you, members, while you're not having a teen girl as girlfriend :D)

Magister Eckhart

04-09-2011, 11:32 PM

If her father was a Negroid or Mongoloid, would you guys still be that lenient?

While a teenager dating a 57 year old is wrong, so is castrating said 57 year old. two wrongs don't make a right :shrug:

I would; Chinese culture luckily allows fathers to step in and be this harsh without being condemned by spineless "humanitarians" like we've produced in unneeded surplus here in the West.

I doubt a Negroid would have much of a problem with it, since the social taboo of age difference is, like in Arab culture, practically non-extant there, so your other hypothetical is irrelevant.

Hess

04-10-2011, 12:21 AM

I would; Chinese culture luckily allows fathers to step in and be this harsh without being condemned by spineless "humanitarians" like we've produced in unneeded surplus here in the West.

I doubt a Negroid would have much of a problem with it, since the social taboo of age difference is, like in Arab culture, practically non-extant there, so your other hypothetical is irrelevant.

Well, most of the blacks here in Florida are extremely socially conservative in every aspect, including that of age. I would imagine that dating someone of a much greater age would be a taboo for them as well.

My main point is that you cannot respond to a reprehensible act with an another reprehensible act and think yourself justified. it just doesn't work that way in the adult world.

alexandra

04-10-2011, 12:40 AM

he should have used pruning shears.

Arne

04-10-2011, 01:21 AM

the father is nothing more better than the guy
it reminds me of the gay cannibal which ate the genitals

Curtis24

04-10-2011, 02:11 AM

Agrippa

04-10-2011, 07:37 AM

I don't see it as being child molestation, though probably still immoral. The girl was post-pubescent - she may have been manipulated, but she wasn't raped. And of course, if she was 18, than it wouldn't have been wrong in any way.

And yeah, the father definitely did an evil thing. The 57-year old guy did not deserve to be castrated, seeing as how he did not commit a sexual assault.

Being castrated, even worse consciously, is one of the hardest punishments for a male thinkable, and that guy had a normal sexual relationship with a sexually mature girl.

This has nothing to do with immoral behaviour of the daughters partner or whatever, it is in my opinion just a question of whether a father has the patria potestas, the control over his family members or not and what he is allowed to do, to ensure his patriarchal control over the other family members.

That is the only question. And as a father, his sole responsibility lies on the control of his daughter. If his daughter WANTS to have sex and a relationship with a male he doesn't approve, that is a thing between him and his daughter, unless we deal with rape, blackmailing or sexual abuse of really immature and helpless beings, which was not the case.

So attacking that poor fellow in such a subhuman way, was in no way justified and this criminal man deserves the same punishment, following mirror punishment of the good old days, with an eye for an eye - and that would be the minimum. I just think about who should do such a cruel and subhuman thing, so I would prefer capital punishment for him.

If fathers are giving the rule over their family members, then this must be made clear by law and custom. But he can't just do what he wants and if his first idea being to maim the other man, something is wrong in his head.

I would have understood, if he would have menacing or even beating up the other man, even killing him would have been more honourable in my opinion (but not justified of course), but what he did just shows his inferiority.

And again, if you want to control your family, keep your family together, you can't blame others for your daughter being a bitch, unless she was lured in a real nasty way into things or the above mentioned crimes were involved.

Plus there must be law and custom, our law and custom is that sexually mature women are ready for consensual sexual relationships, that's the point. If you don't agree with that, you should reintroduce patriarchal law rather, because it has nothing to do with "immoral behaviour" or something "sick" if a male has sex with a sexually mature female, regardless of age differences, because that is a natural thing to happen, if both agree on it.

So this is only a question of father's rule vs. individual decisions and individualism of the daughter, so a very crucial question for our current Western society in general. Because whether you like the partner of your daughter, is not dependent on age alone, for example if the partner is a black or muslim or the like. Would he have been happier with a black muslim at 16 years of age, treating his girl like a whore, this dumb subhuman fellow?

If the father tries to argue otherwise, it might be his view or his defence, but it's not backed up by reality.

Every father - usually - wants to intefere with the contacts a daughter has, and probably don't like the potential father of the children. Now this is something one has to organise (or not), but his action were just that of an animal, which doesn't deserve to be treated like a normal human.

Savant

04-10-2011, 07:46 AM

What's relevant here is whether or not the relationship was voluntary. This girl wasn't being raped, she wasn't a child. It was consensual. So why cheer about an old man getting his nuts chopped off like some 3rd world psychotic muslim animal nation?

Curtis24

04-10-2011, 06:54 PM

Being castrated, even worse consciously, is one of the hardest punishments for a male thinkable, and that guy had a normal sexual relationship with a sexually mature girl.

This has nothing to do with immoral behaviour of the daughters partner or whatever, it is in my opinion just a question of whether a father has the patria potestas, the control over his family members or not and what he is allowed to do, to ensure his patriarchal control over the other family members.

That is the only question. And as a father, his sole responsibility lies on the control of his daughter. If his daughter WANTS to have sex and a relationship with a male he doesn't approve, that is a thing between him and his daughter, unless we deal with rape, blackmailing or sexual abuse of really immature and helpless beings, which was not the case.

So attacking that poor fellow in such a subhuman way, was in no way justified and this criminal man deserves the same punishment, following mirror punishment of the good old days, with an eye for an eye - and that would be the minimum. I just think about who should do such a cruel and subhuman thing, so I would prefer capital punishment for him.

If fathers are giving the rule over their family members, then this must be made clear by law and custom. But he can't just do what he wants and if his first idea being to maim the other man, something is wrong in his head.

I would have understood, if he would have menacing or even beating up the other man, even killing him would have been more honourable in my opinion (but not justified of course), but what he did just shows his inferiority.

And again, if you want to control your family, keep your family together, you can't blame others for your daughter being a bitch, unless she was lured in a real nasty way into things or the above mentioned crimes were involved.

Plus there must be law and custom, our law and custom is that sexually mature women are ready for consensual sexual relationships, that's the point. If you don't agree with that, you should reintroduce patriarchal law rather, because it has nothing to do with "immoral behaviour" or something "sick" if a male has sex with a sexually mature female, regardless of age differences, because that is a natural thing to happen, if both agree on it.

So this is only a question of father's rule vs. individual decisions and individualism of the daughter, so a very crucial question for our current Western society in general. Because whether you like the partner of your daughter, is not dependent on age alone, for example if the partner is a black or muslim or the like. Would he have been happier with a black muslim at 16 years of age, treating his girl like a whore, this dumb subhuman fellow?

If the father tries to argue otherwise, it might be his view or his defence, but it's not backed up by reality.

Every father - usually - wants to intefere with the contacts a daughter has, and probably don't like the potential father of the children. Now this is something one has to organise (or not), but his action were just that of an animal, which doesn't deserve to be treated like a normal human.

First, I absolutely agree that private citizens shouldn't have the authority to castrate people. What the father did was evil, as I said.

However, I don't believe that for an adult man to have a relationship with a girl under 18 is moral either. Such girls can be manipulated in ways by authority, and allowing such behavior could cause a huge slippery slope where men pursue teenage girls and there's a social instability etc.

heathen_son

04-10-2011, 07:30 PM

For a father to take such extreme action, maybe there was something particularly reprehensible about this castrated man's character/history. Remember, lady justice always wears a blindfold, whilst the victim and the offender are usually the two people who know best what has really happened and the real reasons why.

Regardless, the trial has been held and objective judgement has been given. The man has been found (pleaded?) guilty, and will suffer the legal penalty for his crime (surely a custodial sentance). The other is emasculated and scarred for life. He probably won't feel that things are equal and would want the fathers balls removed too, but he will have to live with such bitterness whilst the rest of society are free to feel that they are 'civilised' and not 'barbarians'.

Agrippa

04-10-2011, 08:31 PM

However, I don't believe that for an adult man to have a relationship with a girl under 18 is moral either. Such girls can be manipulated in ways by authority, and allowing such behavior could cause a huge slippery slope where men pursue teenage girls and there's a social instability etc.

Obviously he didn't pursue her just for a one night stand but seems to want a relationship, on which she agreed. Such an age difference might not be ideal, but it is anything else but "immoral", unless a special situation is involved.

There are many girls which were and still are mothers that age, whether they get pregnant by a young man of their age or an older one, they have to take the responsibility for their actions and are neither biologically nor psychologically children any longer.

Also, the only sick behaviour is if males try to have sexual relationships with sexually immature (physically) partners, which is largely out of question at that age.

I don't get the immoral point, or do you think a young male her age treating her like bitch and lets her go when she gets pregnant acts more moral than an older man which approaches a serious relationship?

If you say that

Such girls can be manipulated in ways by authority, and allowing such behavior could cause a huge slippery slope where men pursue teenage girls and there's a social instability etc

If the man exploited authority in a specific way, this might be a specific crime or misuse of authority, depending on his organisation.

Otherwise, you have to ban sexual relationships for girls before that age at all. Because I don't get why an older person should be treated differently than a younger, if approaching a sexually mature person.

Probably a young man misuses some kind of authority as well, the authority of being the captain of the football team, gets the naive girl laid and pregnant and then leaves her alone.

What exactly is the difference then? Is that less moral, just because the male was younger?

And at which point you decide that someone is too old? It is easier to decide when a person is sexually mature, than when a person is "too old" to have a sexual relationship with another person of a specific age.

There is just one point open to debate for me, namely whether the father/family has the full authority over the child and whether the person can decide for herself/himself about sexual activities.

Once you agree that an individual can decide for herself about sexual relationships and being sexually mature, there can be no immoral aspect based on age differences. At least not more so, than immoral aspects might be present in various forms of "relationships", like the mentioned naive girl getting laid on purpose - probably by an irresponsible young male, probably by a foreigner, or whatever.
Age seems to be, overall, of no real importance to me in that respect, especially in comparison to more important aspects to consider.

I would be much happier knowing that a high level and responsible male might become the father of my grandchildren and husband of my daughter, even if he is 20 years older, than a choice I can't agree upon, regardless of being the same age, younger or older.

Sexual activities in that respect are up to the individual, I don't care for them at all. The only real important thing is how it affects a person and if at all or how children being produced. These important questions must be adressed and again, age is of secondary importance for that.

Also, it is up to low and custom to decide when a girl becomes sexually mature. We had a vote for that and I agree that somewhere between 14-18 the point should be set, probably best at 16 if talking about much older males.

Once the person reached that age, age differences are no issue for the law and group as such, nor has it anything to do with moral.

There are fathers which might think their daughter is immature with 25, but in the end, there must be an objective and functional criteria applied and agreed upon, in a given community.

Regardless, the trial has been held and objective judgement has been given. The man has been found (pleaded?) guilty, and will suffer the legal penalty for his crime (surely a custodial sentance). The other is emasculated and scarred for life. He probably won't feel that things are equal and would want the fathers balls removed too, but he will have to live with such bitterness whilst the rest of society are free to feel that they are 'civilised' and not 'barbarians'.

It is not this case alone, but many others as well. Whenever I read about the ridiculous punishments for physical damages done to other persons on purpose, I get very angry.

Oftentimes, if you trick the bank or ministry of finance, not talking about "political crimes" in various countries, you get significantly higher punishments! As if hurting or even maiming an individual is less important than material delicts.

Same goes for real child abuse and the like, I always wonder how this fucked up legal system in the West works and how ridiculous it is.

The punishment must be in a way appropriate and proportional to the crime, this means for that case:
- mirror punishment ("eye for an eye")
- capital punishment
- labour camp under "special conditions" for life

Any other punishment is just ridiculous and totally unacceptable.

If he gets away with 2 years or something like that, it just shows how much the legal system is worth these days...

Had a similar case of a German losing one eye because a Turkish idiot hit him on purpose with a bottle. Sometimes you don't even get into prison for such crimes! The victims have to live with the damage their whole life, whereas the perpetrator gets away with ridiculously low punishments too often.

This legal system is just so fucked up, it makes me angry every day.

And the worst of all are "mitigating circumstances" when a person has a psychological defect, as if that would make a crime more "excusable", when in fact the justice for the innocent and protection of those and the group as a whole should be in the focus of the jurisdiction.

If someone is dangerous because of a defect which can't be eliminated, this is no excuse, but makes the case even worse, because someone doing a crime more or less by chance, while being usually a "normal acting person" is much less of a threat and problem to society.

Applied to this case, again, such individuals like this subhuman are a threat to the group as such, because obviously, if he reacts that way, something goes wrong in his head and probably next time he doesn't like the neighbour playing his music and singing, cuts his tongue out or whatever idea this sick lowest level subject might have.

Because as a rule, if someone acts that way, out of nothing, he is an uncontrollable risk and psychologically inferior. More or less normal persons don't act that way, unless being put into extreme situations and sociocultural manipulation.

Curtis24

04-11-2011, 03:00 AM

Well Agrippa, I agree with what you said. However, I still think that the parents should have some authority over a pre-18year old girl. But at the same time, you are dead right that many other pre-adult boys who the girl would have sex with, would be worse than a stable relationship with an older man.

Agrippa

04-11-2011, 07:33 AM

Well Agrippa, I agree with what you said. However, I still think that the parents should have some authority over a pre-18year old girl.

Honestly I would like to have (personally) authority beyond that as well. But that's a thing of our society and communities, as well as in the family. You can't just blame another man, when your daughter is no child any more and there are no general rules, law and custom, on which people rely in this respect.

I don't want to see a daughter or any valuable young girl wasting her life with drug addicts, as a cheap whore or with bad and/or foreign elements if having better options. However, as you said yourself now, age is of secondary importance in this respect, I don't know why people are so fixated about it and it is a much bigger and wider question for our society, law and community to debate - where we want to go as families and group as a whole.

Talvi

04-11-2011, 08:29 AM

Agrippa

04-11-2011, 09:08 AM

I wonder how old you guys are or what kind of people you were at the age of 17. Or if you know any people who are 17 now.

Because a 17 year old is still a kid. They think like kids and they act like kids. A lot of you seem to take her as an adult.

Also, I always thought its against the law to be 60 and have a sexual relationship with anyone under 18, if the parents protested.

Like I said before, if they are sexually active and sexually mature, they are no children any more in this respect, whether they have sex with someone of their age and get diseases or a pregnancy or someone older makes no difference then anyway.

So if you think people that age can't handle sex, you must ban sexual activities at that age as a whole.

And you speaking about people today at the age of 17, they are anything else but children if it is about their sexual activities and maturity. Unless they are retarded, they can also think for themselves. They earn their own money quite often, have their bank account, live on their own at times and so on.

If you say they are children, and can't decide for themselves, this must be applied to any other aspect of their life as well, and not just their sexual activities with potentially older partners.

I just wonder from what people want "to protect" people which are not 21 when they do anything they want anyway and oftentimes much worse things than having an older partner.

In this respect I just see a huge hypocrisy.

In most older societies it would have been the other way around by the way: No full rights but sexually mature = marriage, children, whole package.

It is not and was not unusual that partners are not of the same age, so what's the fuzz about, if looking at various other aspects of "youth experience" these days which are much worse it gets even ridiculous. Because while age differences between partners being something which one could observe in most societies, certain other aspects of today's society being REALLY much more abnormal.

If a person living in a protected social environment, being psychologically somewhat retarded and highly naive, playing still around like a child and the like, we speak of a psychologically immature person - probably even if this person is older than 20.

But honestly, did you ever look out at the youth of that age and how they behave? In a realistic manner?

I'm older now but not too old for not being involved in the same processes and I can assure you that at that age (above 16), people make their own decisions and are sexually mature (as a rule, exceptions excluded).

If a 30 year old attractive women would have approached me or one of my friends at that time, it would have been our decision, without a doubt, whether we would have a sexual relationship with her or not. And in that respect, we surely were no children any more. Actually one of my classmates had a girlfriend which was way above his age for a time with the age of 17.

And that was a younger male other female thing, which is much more unusual and biologically less functional than the other way around...

The main issue being diseases, pregnancies and the influence of an early sexualisation of the psychological development (which can be discussed).

Yet, you get those things when being sexually active, regardless of the partners age.

So again, if you think they are not mature yet, can't handle sexuality, you must control them in a completely different way than it is done now (no sex before marriage and marriage with 18 for girls and 21-25 for boys or something like that in traditional societies...) and to think of "innocent victims" and looking at the whole issue just from the age difference-perspective is nonsense.

Or do you think a girl abused or just manipulated by a group of 17 year old Near Easterners will be better off (also from the group's, bloodline and longer term perspective) than one having a stable relationship with an older partner, becoming a wife and mother?

lei.talk

04-11-2011, 11:05 AM

more than half
of my class-mates, associates, employees
are/were seventeen (less than one-third my age (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=323803#post323803)).

Also, I always thought its against the law to be 60 and have a sexual relationship with anyone under 18, if the parents protested.

"Helmut Seifert, 47, an ethnic German originally from Russia, was enraged when he heard his 17-year-old daughter was having a relationship with Phillip Genscher, 57...He told police: "...You said you couldn't stop him - so I did."

GERMANY (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Germany)
§ 182: "(2) A person over twenty-one years of age who abuses a person under sixteen years of age, in that he: 1. commits sexual acts on the person or allows them to be committed on himself by the person; or 2. induces the person to commit sexual acts on a third person or to allow them to be committed on the person by a third person, and thereby exploits the victim's lack of capacity for sexual self-determination, shall be punished with imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine. [..] the act shall only be prosecuted upon complaint, unless the prosecuting authority considers ex officio that it is required to enter the case because of the special public interest therein. [..] the court may dispense with punishment pursuant to these provisions if , in consideration of the conduct of the person against whom the act was directed, the wrongfulness of the act is slight."

RUSSIA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe#Russia)
Article 134. Illicit Sexual Relations or Other Sexual Actions with a Person Who Has Not Reached 16 Years of Age

Illicit sexual relations, pederasty, or lesbianism, committed by a person who has reached 18 years of age with a person who obviously has not reached 16 years of age, shall be punishable by restraint of liberty for a term of up to three years or by deprivation of liberty for a term of up to four years

which country did he think they were in (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=214793#post214793)?

Talvi

04-11-2011, 02:08 PM

I think people who are 17 are still kids. Even if they are "sexually mature".
You think that the minute a girl becomes "sexually mature"(which can sometimes even happen before 10) they should do and sex what they want? Like nature and biology shows us how to act and what is right and whats OK? The fathers feelings, too, are only natural. Why should we restrict that?

Some girls like old geezers, but its far from the norm, and I see the relationship they had as totally fucked up. The 60 year old dude should have known better.

anonymaus

04-11-2011, 02:48 PM

The fathers feelings, too, are only natural. Why should we restrict that?

He all-but murders people whose behavior he does not agree with.

Would you care to restate the question?

Agrippa

04-11-2011, 03:01 PM

I think people who are 17 are still kids. Even if they are "sexually mature".
You think that the minute a girl becomes "sexually mature"(which can sometimes even happen before 10)

Now you confuse the first menstruation with sexually mature, which is not the same.

Sexually mature refers in my book to physical development in general. So when a girl has developed her female attributes.

To put it simple, if you can't properly distinguish a girl of age X with a girl of the age of 21 based on her sexual attributes, you deal with a mature version and it is just natural that males of any age feel attracted to such girls.

This is the crucial difference to pedophilia, because pedophiles don't care for the age of a person, but want immature sexual traits. If a girl at the age of thirteen (f.e.) would develop a more feminine body, it would become uninteresting for the pedophile, while she becomes interesting for normal man.

Here is a graphic illustration of female growth pattern (which ends earlier than in males, being accelerated through secular acceleration and different between different biological variants):
http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/7733/wachstum2.png (http://img16.imageshack.us/i/wachstum2.png/)

Mature male and female of the Europid race (rather mesomorphic constitution, one has to adapt that to the whole body type spectrum of course):
http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/3638/mundw.jpg (http://img818.imageshack.us/i/mundw.jpg/)

If a female had the first mentruation AND mature body development, she is sexually mature.

Some are earlier at that stage, some later, but with 16-17, in the current context (secular acceleration), practically ALL NORMAL girls are sexually mature.

Here some "size 16 teenager" from a campaign. Some of them are not 18, now tell me those are "children" from a biological and social point of view!

http://twistsis.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/1000036083.jpg

Tell me who is not older than 18...

17-year-old Chloe

http://twistsis.wordpress.com/2008/04/28/size-16-teenager-has-brought-more-attention-to-miss-england-com/

Here the "Miss Teen contestants":
http://www.appletravel.cn/images/uploads/11872263336831.jpg

Now I wonder where one finds the immature traits.

And that a male pursuing them, regardless of his own age, acts "abnormal" is a misconception.

Sorry, but that's just totally unrealistic, in fact unnatural.

The problem is rather that the whole social environment is sexualised and especially in the USA the hypocrisy is huge, if looking at various ads and contests with individuals which are indeed not even juveniles, but being dressed up like cheap whores from the street.

That is, in a way, a big contradiction, especially in the USA...

You think that the minute a girl becomes "sexually mature"(which can sometimes even happen before 10) they should do and sex what they want?

Not necessarily. I said, that if they can have sex at that age, it doesn't matter which age the partner has.

That was my point. I didn't even say that it is good if every sexually mature girl, some even earlier these days actually, start with sexual activities. That was not what I said.

Especially if they have mainly "uncommitted" sexual relationships, they often get rather frustrated sooner or later and for sure not better partners and wifes for later life.

BUT if you allow them to have sex, I see no problem whatsoever with an older guy doing it, or a younger. That makes no big difference then. THAT was my point.

Like nature and biology shows us how to act and what is right and whats OK?

Humans are social and cultural beings, as such they being always influenced, "manipulated" if you want, by their environment.

The crucial question is just, what is good for those young ones on the short and long run, what is good for the group as a whole on the short and long run.

I don't think it is good that they have too many sexual relationships in general, because they being damaged for life and obviously, our birth rates are not rising neither.

But as I said above, if a committed older guy takes a younger woman as his girlfriend or wife, probably even founding a family, I have much more sympathies for him than for a 17 year old which just abuses the girl and lets her behind, with diseases, a pregnancy, or at least psychologically damaged.

Because in the end, it is the life perspective which matters, for the individuals and group, nothing else.

Anything else is just pseudoreligious crap, from this or that sort, we have to look at the results.

The fathers feelings, too, are only natural. Why should we restrict that?

I'm all for giving the father more control, as long as he acts like a rational and responsible person, I consider the father being the head of the family.

But this guy was a maniac, a subhuman subject which doesn't deserve to be treated like a human because of what he did, because of how he reacted.

And like I said, it is up to us to change laws and custom.

I for myself wouldn't want my girl to date with ANYONE, REGARDLESS OF AGE, with which I am not ok.

I might be ok with an older man, if he is like this:
http://www.dalan.no/Portals/dalan/bilder/advokater/IMG_6111_john_arff-pettersen.jpg

Because he would have status, material wealth and excellent genes, before my girls dating with this in particular:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40514000/jpg/_40514739_congoman.jpg

That the first one is 40 years of age older would be of no great importance to me, if everything else is fine and they like each other.

Of course, a younger version of the older man would be best, but hey, you don't get everything you want in this life, sometimes you have to live with a compromise.

And I would prefer a committed older male as the father of grandchildren before scum of the same age, which ruins the girls, every day.

Some girls like old geezers, but its far from the norm, and I see the relationship they had as totally fucked up. The 60 year old dude should have known better.

He just acted normal.

The only problem he had was the father.

Now even if the father is not an insane subhuman, like this one, one can ask whether it should be allowed to date a daughter, if the father is against it.

But that leads us back to patria potestas and a stronger role of the males and fathers in society, it has nothing to do with protecting girls from older blokes.

I for myself would have had a much bigger problem with the father not wanting me and making that absolutely clear, than the age difference as such. Because it is part of the respect between males, that they usually don't touch the females of the other, just like that.

But like I said, if all the young ones today behave like they do, why should he care?

They do often much worse things and probably he would even have saved that girl from a worse fate, who know's that these days?

Now he being crippled in the worst way, by this subhuman father, which acted like an animal, dishonourable and disproportionate.

As I said, I don't think at all that things running good in Europe, because if they would, the results would be better.

But fact is, the problem is not the age difference between partners, that is up to the individuals involved and probably the families.

If the father can't control the daughter, he can't blame the other man primarily, because he just acted normal, while his daughter didn't follow his rule. It was his problem that he couldn't control the daughter, not the other man using a good opportunity, for which all males are biologically programmed and they would be dysfunctional if they wouldn't, because after all, it is about biological success.

Probably the father will embrace the mulatto children of the guy the same age, which his daughter will give birth to, or being glad that she gets no children at all now, like even more women in Germany.

From a rational point of view, much worse things can happen to a girl than to have a relationship with an older male, and that is for sure.

Never forget, it was her decision, she wasn't forced into anything. If something went wrong, then in her family, for which the father is responsible and society as a whole.

But having bad feeling to someone, for a better or worse reason, doesn't mean you have the right to cripple him in such an inhumane (or any other) way.

Or otherwise, like I said, should I cut out the tongue of my neighbour if I don't like him singing, or chop off ones hand, just because he rings my doorbell when being drunk...

There is something like a proportionate and a disproportionate reaction you know.

Burning your daughter alive would be another disproportionate reaction if being not happy with her lifestyle, to give another example...

Talvi

04-11-2011, 04:47 PM

Now I wonder where one finds the immature traits.

In her brain.

One reason why some women like older men is because they have lived, are smart, have developed a "real" personalty, character.

Has a 17 year old girl? What is it besides looking sexually mature that makes her fit for a 60 year old man? Unless that man is only looking for young booty or someone to take care of him before he dies?

Agrippa

04-11-2011, 07:10 PM

In her brain.

Then you have to control them all the time and not allow them any sexual activity or free decisions of importance at all. This has again little to do with the age difference, but with the behaviour and options people of that age have.

And if in most societies and even these days so many of these young people are ready to work, to have children and family, driving a car or drinking alcohol and the like, they are hardly children any more. In the past even less so, talking about a 17 year old woman as a child would have been ridiculed in most periods, unless there was a bad climate and starvation, because then people mature later, which was the case in Europe some generations ago f.e.

I can assure you, that there are plenty of people that age, especially girls, which are usually physically AND mentally earlier mature than males, which are far ahead of many older people.

So if you say they are not "mentally mature", seriously, some people NEVER ARE and others with 14, 15, 16, 17 - whatever age you want beyond a certain point of psychophysical development.

Or do you really think that every 17 year old person is not mature in the sense of intellectual and personal development, while everybody one or two years later is?

That is absurd!

There are many people at the age of 17 which are far ahead of most 70 year old ones. And while they still develop individually, that would mean that the majority of people shouldn't have the right to decide anything, because they dwell on a lower niveau.

That can be discussed, from a philosophical point of view, but doesn't really help in this matter.

One reason why some women like older men is because they have lived, are smart, have developed a "real" personalty, character.

As I said somewhere else, I propose that certain aspects of sexual behaviour and preferences being both genetic and imprinted early on.

Secondly many of the young girls dating much older males, if it is not just the money and options they have, date males which are ABOVE THEIR NIVEAU.

They get males which they often wouldn't get at the same age. Because for a female, being young, fresh and fertile in itself is a great gift, especially for an older man.

That means, the older a male becomes, the more valuable almost every younger women is. So a high level male at young age might not even look at some of those girls, while an older higher level man will.

So they get the chance to get a high level male, not just socio-economically, but also for the genetic and memetic legacy he can offer.

This is a real option, even more so since males tend to become calmer and more family oriented with age, and obviously happier with the younger woman, than he might have been when being her age. This way many stable relationships come together, with the women getting an experienced and proven male, which has something to bring into the relationship and is committed, as well as the older male getting a young and fertile partner, for founding a family and experiencing his "second spring".

That is a fair deal in my opinion, and if two people agree upon this, it is completely normal and natural, much more so than many other things I can observe these days.

Has a 17 year old girl?

If talking about stable relationships with older males, most of THOSE girls that age yes. Many rather immature and naive ones see that as a strange behaviour and don't understand the will of a girl to get committed male for founding a partnership and family. This is a really pity, especially for the younger ones, and of course both sexes, since the (especially younger) males are not innocent in this respect, for ruing the sexual relationships and damaging personalities for the rest of their lifes.

What is it besides looking sexually mature that makes her fit for a 60 year old man?

She is fertile and ready to get pregnant, she can offer him her fertility and body, he can offer...read above.

60 is quite extreme, I don't say this is ideal, but some might argue the same for a male which is 25?

Or 30?

When do you draw the line, say this male is too old for a sexually mature women that age, but this one isn't?

It is ridiculous and unnatural. They themselves and probably the family involved (if they are not retarded), should decide. If it fits for THEM, and it is THEIR LIFE, why do you care?

Unless that man is only looking for young booty or someone to take care of him before he dies?

Even if, as I said before, if he cares and brings in his qualities, it is up to the woman to accept that or not.

A 17 year old male is even more likely to search for booty alone and a young man might get sick and needing care too?

This are no arguments for me. They always fall back to the "the age difference is a problem because of the age difference..."

Which is a logical fallacy and tautology.

You have to reason why it is bad for the old man, for the young woman, for both on the short and longer run, as well as for the group as a whole, if you give them the freedom to decide for themselves whether they want an older or respectively younger partner.

What are the arguments, the "special conditions" which can never be found in partnerships of roughly the same age?

As I said above, 60 to 17 is a huge gap, I don't consider that being ideal, nor would I advice people to mate that way. But the male should be older, in most cases that is better and fits the biological reality, and the only limit should be the sexual maturity of the partners. If they are, and if it works for two people despite the age difference, so what, what's the problem with that?

I might say myself it is strange to look at, sometimes, but if it works for them, why should I care, if it doesn't harm the group, but probably even good children come out of it?

I can imagine worse things to happen, so I prefer to attack the worse things and leave the rest to the people to decide it by themselves. Personal freedom of choice is always preferable, if there are no good and coercive arguments for the well being of many other individuals and the group as a whole.

So how does such a relationship harm other people than those involved? And how should it harm those involved, in a way you couldn't find with people of the same age?

Talvi

04-11-2011, 07:27 PM

Socio-economically this old dude is going to die soon and if the girl were to offer him her "fertility" shed soon be left with no man, no money and a bunch of kids whose father was as old as their grandfather. Yeah, this can happen to any woman, but when you have a man that old, its gonna happen for sure.

Im not sure what other people want from relationships and such but if the only things the old dude and the teenager have to share is her body, fertility and his money.... what the hell is that? If they have something in common as people, they must be two really exceptional persons.

Of course their relationship doesnt harm other people but I just personally do not like old-farts, and I dont like old-farts going for teenagers. It is something I would not encourage in general and try to rationalize. Whats gross is gross. Somehow I see their actions as highly self-centered and somehow immoral. At 60 they should be nice wise respectable grandfathers, not fucking girls the age of their granddaughters.

Agrippa

04-11-2011, 07:49 PM

Socio-economically this old dude is going to die soon and if the girl were to offer him her "fertility" shed soon be left with no man

A younger bloke without as much dedication, experience, material wealth and worse genes might have left her or dying in a car accident or because of cancer as well.

While I see the problem, you can't say that for sure, neither can you guarantee anybody a happy life and relationship, regardless of how old the partners are.

no money and a bunch of kids whose father was as old as their grandfather.

Probably he has more experience and patience, being both wiser and more intelligent than the younger guy she would have get otherwise?

Yeah, this can happen to any woman, but when you have a man that old, its gonna happen for sure.

If the man is 60, he might get 90 years old in good shape, while another gets a car accident or stroke before hitting 50.

Or how many women being left alone, pregnant or with a young child, by a young partner? Are they really better off?

Again, I'm not saying a huge age difference is ideal, I'm just pointing to the fact, that the disadvantages are very relative and it is in any case no issue for the law and customary rules, or for "moral" being raped by moralists which say it "is wrong".

If those two decide so, it is not and they might have a better life and experience than many others, both of them. How can you know, how can you decide it FOR THEM?

Im not sure what other people want from relationships and such but if the only things the old dude and the teenager have to share is her body, fertility and his money.... what the hell is that?

I'm just point to the age related HUGE AND VERY IMPORTANT advantages they might have from each, aside of all the other good things and traits they might share and live happy with.

This is the SPECIFIC advantage of many such relationships, this doesn't have to mean it ends there.

And why do you have a problem with that anyway? It is the way life goes in the end, younger or older, it has always to do with those aspects, in animals and human alike, hidden or open, directly or indirectly. And IF NOT, it is more abnormal than if.

If they have something in common as people, they must be two really exceptional persons.

Probably they are? Probably that is just right for them...who knows.

Of course their relationship doesnt harm other people but I just personally do not like old-farts

Sorry, you might not like to hear it, but just listen: If you don't die young, you end up as an old fart as well, better realise that, all of them were young people and even if they are old, they are still humans and not some kind of mummy, especially if being rather healthy and in good shape.

and I dont like old-farts going for teenagers.

Well, I wouldn't think too well of a 60 year old going specifically after teenagers all the time neither. But if, more or less by chance, they happen to meet each other and like to form a partnership, I might say, "well, not ideal, but your choice..."

Honestly, I think for all the things said it suffices if an older man goes for a younger woman, which is still no teenager.

But if it just happen that they meet each other and things are alright for them, I see no reason to blame for some kind of "immorality" or "crime", if they are both mature and decide for themselves, what a 17 year old girl is supposed to be in a healthy societal system.

If somebody has to interfere, only for good reasons, but the age difference alone is no good reason.

It is something I would not encourage in general and try to rationalize. Whats gross is gross. Somehow I see their actions as highly self-centered and somehow immoral.

If they don't harm the group, they are allowed to be "self-centered", after all, it is the rest of their lifes and can you give them the family and children they want to have, the experience which they want to make? Can you give them these? Can you give them that chance?

Why do you have a problem if they get one.

As I said, I don't encourage such extreme matings for sure, that is a huge gap, but I'm not discussing whether this is ideal or not, I'm debating for whether this is "immoral" or a general problem, which allows, even demands intervention - TO THAT I say no.

I'm not saying it is better for a 17 year old to mate a 60 year old, of course not, that would be strange. But there might be this special constellations, for two people, in which this is a good choice and I just don't see the need or right for intervention.

At 60 they should be nice wise respectable grandfathers, not fucking girls the age of their granddaughters.

Do you know how many great personalities had fathers that age? They wouldn't exist without them "fucking" fertile women younger than they were.

After all, men are largely fertile, usually, to the age related death almost or even that.

They might have fought hard to get were they are and have proven their qualities, but didn't get too many children so far. Why shouldn't they try it a last time, especially if they have good traits?

Better an old man with good traits getting a child than a young one with bad.

Again, the age issue is not decisive, in no way it is, if looking at the bigger picture.