16yo Chad bangs gf's mom at naked twister party!

@TheWalkingGhost: she didn't get arrested for the sex.

That was my thoughts about the story initially as well...but it turns out according to the police there's zero evidence of rape, and the woman took pictures of her and the boyfriend while they were having sex and showed them to her daughter. I'm not saying it's impossible that the guy raped her, but honestly it doesn't seem very likely.

She gets arrested for being raped?

@Jag85

No, she was arrested for contributing to the delinquency of a minor, which if the story is true, makes perfect sense (she got the teens alcohol, weed, and masturbated with toys in front of them). Regarding the alleged rape, the police said there was no evidence of a rape and in fact there evidence to the contrary...she actually took pictures or herself and the guy while having sex and later showed them to her daughter.

Let's say she was raped though...that doesn't make her other crimes go away and there's plenty of evidence she did commit those crimes.

3rd

Wow, lucky little bastards! That doesn't include the "raping" part naturally, but it seems like the mom wanted to hump so she surely kinda brought it upon herself.

by "where" i meant "why" of course.

plot twist: Ming Mao is the 16yo boyfriend

@lostrib said:

@MakeMeaSammitch said:

@mingmao3046 said:

But wait, theres more! This isn't the first time she made the news.

Back in 2011 she was featured on an article about contacting her husband serving in Afghanistan. LOL. I wonder how many guys banged her while he was fighting for the country?

I missed this part.

Holy Shit, **** this lady, what an inconsiderate person, I hope he gets the kids.

You mean the guy who the article describes as having PTSD and anger issues?

I think I'd have that too if my wife fucked a 15 year old.

Nothing about this is hot. It's disgusting, the whole situation is disgusting.

Clearly she took the pictures to provide evidence of the rape.

I didn't say she did.

She didn't, and they are currently separated.

you said it's legal for her to have sex with an 18 year old. I was just pointing out that the legal issue isn't from the sex

That's a messed up woman..

I said that because some miss understand what the issue was. I never said that was the issue.

I'd like to say I'd smash but if that teenager seriously had a 10 incher and she took all that in, I probably couldn't compete with that. It would be like throwing a needle into the grand canyon...

youre ruining the fun of this thread

Age of consent in Georgia is 16. The human body for 100,00's of thousands of years had sex typically at around that age.

This article is pretty damn hot, I wish I was at that party.

It's actually extremely rare for a women to enjoy and have normal contact sex with a penis of that size. Even seasoned porn stars have groan faces and do the secret "tap out" in scenes with a penis that big. She'd welcome yours unless she has a fetish.

Well....That went wrong from the start and just rolled down the crap hill with a vengeance.

because you like having sex with unconscious women?

There's no way it is actually that big. He probably just told her that, and girls have no idea about measurements, so she just took his word

I can't comment this without losing the little class I have left in me.

banging a hot teen (legally) and her hot mom (legally), whats not to love.

How exactly does reporting what other weird people have done equal misogyny? I think the false calls of misogyny have probably happened often enough to make most people ignore them already. Don't make it even worse!

I see you are unfamiliar with the TC. Read his posts/threads then get back to me.

Ok so he/she posts quite a lot about gender issues. I still don't think just declaring people as misogynistic is particularly helpful. It's the kinda thing that makes most people stay away from such subjects because the entire debates seem to be located deep within a poisoned well. And are you equally as eager in calling out women who appear to be misandrists? From my experience in these types of things, most people seem to just be picking a team and then blocking out everything that doesn't fit it.

With all due respect you are talking about what you don't have any clue about. Which is pointless and I'm bored with this. Ask anyone here if you don't believe. At least those that are familiar with the individual.

For centuries, wives have been considered the property of their husbands along with their homes, land, and children. Saying that is okay because it has been occurring for a relatively long time is as fallacious as saying it is acceptable for adults to engage in sexual relations with someone else regardless of mental maturity as long as they are of physical age and the circumstances seemed okay for both parties. It is an argumentum ad antiquitatem, an appeal to tradition because teenagers are not as mature, mentally as adults and that is a biological fact.

I wasn't trying to comment on the validity of your position. I was trying to point out that your approach isn't productive. Just using random buzzword X to mean roughly "bad person" almost never achieves anything. Even if you're roughly correct, what you're ultimately doing is just helping to make certain subjects more about emotions and less about reason. That's not helping anyone. If you think someone has a poorly constructed opinion, just explain why! If you can do that, you really don't need these kind of demonizing buzzwords.

It's your opinion that a 16 year old having sex is "disgusting". It's pretty common place and accepted around the world. Biologically and Legally sound. Fact.

Mentally Maturity causing problems with sex at that age? Debatable at best. It's surely not stopping anyone. Murica' is just pretty up tight when it comes to sex and even most states here are 16/17.

Actually, no. I said your argument is not reliable and I explained why.

There is evidence to suggest that teenagers who engage in sexual activity are more likely to experience depression and attempt suicide that those who do not.

When compared to teens who are not sexually active, teenage boys and girls who are sexually active are significantly less likely to be happy and more likely to feel depressed.

When compared to teens who are not sexually active, teenage boys and girls who are sexually active are significantly more likely to attempt suicide.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/06/sexually-active-teenagers-are-more-likely-to-be-depressed

Next, it is not attractive to engage in an act that would bring a child into the world and with that, the responsibility of caring for it, with the income of a typical teenager (a low one). Relying on the enjoyment of a present goal of sexual release without a good plan to handle its consequences is not attractive.

I could say the same about men towards teenage girls who would just like a "sugar daddy." Said excessive dependence does not show strength of character when a good, healthy relationship is about equality. If people wish to act like toys for the leader of their relationship, it says quite a bit about how that is not attractive, but repulsive at worst and lacking interesting qualities at best (a person is molded to fit a partner precisely rather than a mutual change).

Hormones are not enough.

Mods why do you let mingmao keep making threads?

I generally agree on the position but that study has quite a few glaring holes:

-Didn't compare country to country. If it really is down to biological age, rather than just the social expectations associated with that age, you'd surely expect the effect to be even worse in countries with lower ages of consent (most of europe is 16. Japan is 13)

-Didn't compare the rates with adults!! Pretty obvious one, you would've thought. One plausible explanation is just that being sexually active at all makes you more prone to depression.

-Didn't control for the fact that it's an age where you're at school. Schools a nightmare for all kinds of emotional crap and tend to make magnify them all. Comparing to (for example) homeschooled kids might cancel that effect.

On the pregnancy point, I completely agree though. Teenage pregnancy just isn't good in the modern world.

...the sex with an unconscious woman part?

Oh right, you don't mind doing that

I said legally, so That means they are awake.

oh, then I guess you wouldn't be in to it

To say it's "disgusting" is still just an opinion. It's not like they're doing something socially uncommon, illegal, or bodily abnormal/harmful.

Tell anyone IRL teen sex is disgusting they'll look at you like an old stuck up republican nutjob. All the studies in the world won't make it a disgusting act.

That depends on the teen

If they are under-age, then yes definitely disgusting territory. But we are talking past the legal limit and straight sex.

Thats pretty much the normal human development.

straight sex?

-Didn't compare country to country. If it really is down to biological age, rather than just the social expectations associated with that age, you'd surely expect the effect to be even worse in countries with lower ages of consent (most of europe is 16. Japan is 13)

You are implying that the younger a person is when beginning sexual activity, the higher the risk of depression. The study I gave a link to only speaks of teenagers without that implication. Next, you are implying that cultural relativism is relevant enough that the teenagers of the United States only represent this country, but not other nations such as those of Europe and Japan. However, you are not providing any contrary evidence, so what you call glaring holes, at this point, is conjecture.

-Didn't compare the rates with adults!! Pretty obvious one, you would've thought. One plausible explanation is just that being sexually active at all makes you more prone to depression.

-Didn't control for the fact that it's an age where you're at school. Schools a nightmare for all kinds of emotional crap and tend to make magnify them all. Comparing to (for example) homeschooled kids might cancel that effect.

While these may be possibilities, again, do you have any evidence which you would like to share that supports your claims?

I have not actually said that which is why I am wondering about the reason you have replied to me, twice, with your bolded and underlined statement. However, there are a number of things that are incorrect about what you are saying. For one, how common something is does not determine whether or not it is correct. Secondly, nor does legal precedent. Finally, bodily harm is not a factor in whether something is correct. With those three truths in mind, certain circumstances can be lovable or disgusting.

Not really how the burden of proof works in science I'm afraid. They're the ones making the claim. I'm responding to the claim. I'm not necessarily claiming the opposite (if I WAS then I would have that burden of proof)

You are offering critique without giving reason for said critique.

Science is disproven by contrary evidence rather than conjecture.

I'm sorry I thought you were the one laughably called it "disgusting". Quote chain read fail.

Well the specific reason in that example was to try and make sure age wasn't a confounding variable. But once again, you kinda seem to have a wrong idea about how the burden of proof works. I'm not trying to disprove this claim. I'm trying to explain why you shouldn't consider this as proof.

You're kinda acting as if science works by 1 side presenting some evidence and then another side has to present opposing evidence and then the winner is who comes up with the most compelling evidence. That's not how any of the sciences work. The burden is entirely on the person making the claim and they're always assumed to be incorrect from the get go (aka "the null hypothesis"). So the general reason why people criticise without needing to give a reason is that the assumption is that this person is wrong and we're trying to find out exactly how. This is why physicists have to confirm their results to insane levels of confidence (5 sigma in particle physics, for example, which is about equivalent of 1000 of these studies done in different places and different ways)

I do not have a misunderstanding of the burden of proof. In fact, at no point did I say that study is proof. Specifically, I said that there is evidence to suggest that the research hypothesis is not incorrect. We may continue this discussion with more evidence to suggest this or evidence which disproves it, but if all I am getting in response is assertions that it is either a moot point or an incorrect one without providing anything, I doubt this conversation shall go very far. I say that because in Off-Topic, users typically provide evidence to suggest one side of a debate then the other side provides alternative evidence.

I am not the researcher for this issue or a research participant. Since that is the case, the burden of proof is not really on me, either. However, as a commentator on this issue, I may provide evidence to support my position and if I find contrary evidence then I would be happy to share it. That said, I am under no obligation to take more time and continue providing evidence. This is a hobby of mine. As with me, you are welcome to participate if you feel comfortable doing so.