As the saying goes, "If there's grass on the pitch..."
For countless millenia the gauge of whether a female is 'ready' for sexual relations is whether she is menstruating. The age of consent is a relatively modern concept. That's what I'm getting at. I'm a perfectly normal member of society. There's no way I'll touch a girl under the age of consent in an improper manner. But that doesn't mean I can't appreciate their beauty and appeal. No way I'll date a teenager either; great bodies but their brains aren't developed.
( Ratsta, Sat 27 Sep 2008, 6:03, archived)

You're not making it better here.

( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Sat 27 Sep 2008, 6:04, archived)

That's because you're shaped by the contemporary social construct and closed-minded.
The facts of my argument are irrefutable.
( Ratsta, Sat 27 Sep 2008, 6:10, archived)

Yes, I am such a sheep for not having sexual thoughts if I see
an over-developed 13 year old. How silly of me!
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Sat 27 Sep 2008, 6:11, archived)

haha, also, your post sounds like the defense that Gary Glitter's lawyer might use.
Fucking hell.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Sat 27 Sep 2008, 6:37, archived)

err what?
You leaps of logic are unfathomable.

I believe that Gary Glitter's lawyer argued that he didn't have sex with underage girls.
That's different from saying "I done it but it's OK because mother nature says it's OK even though your laws don't."
You seem to have overlooked that even though I can appreciate beauty, I wouldn't cross the line of what is legal and socially acceptable. It's a shame that things that don't fit within the narrow views of social norms can not be discussed without slanderous intimation.
( Ratsta, Sat 27 Sep 2008, 6:41, archived)

MIGHT use, you cretin.

( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Sat 27 Sep 2008, 6:43, archived)