Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

Greg wrote
This sounds like you were living in a movie co-directed by John Hughes and Martin Scorsese.

Shrug.

Sabin wrote:That being said, this wasn’t a mentally well person. She faked having cancer to get her family to reunite around her after she had drive them away, and when she couldn’t keep her lies up committed suicide by shooting herself in the head. It was only after they got the autopsy did they learn she was faking her cancer for a year. She was an alcoholic drug addict who wasn’t well. I think about her a lot. At 16 (17 in a few months), glassesed, braced, I wasn’t ready for a relationship with this person. When I said “perhaps,” I meant an STD, but that isn’t life-destroying. As a child of the 90’s, I confess I still do have some of that programming with me.

Either way. This story is an overshare. Probably shouldn’t have done so. But I felt like sharing so up it stays.

This sounds like you were living in a movie co-directed by John Hughes and Martin Scorsese.

HarryGoldfarb wrote:

ITALIANO wrote:You don't understand. It's not just a fact - it's perfectly normal, usually not violent, and psychoanalysis doesn't consider it a sickness or a pathology. The simple truth is that, at 17 (and actually even a bit earlier) we are very sexual and often healthily so. The idea that a law should prevent people from having sex at such an age is objectively absurd, but if you think it's right, good for you. What's less good is that you can seriously think that as many people have sex at 12 (which is not true) and that it's the same thing. No, there is a difference between 12 and 17 (ask many Venezuelan priests). Anyway, I have a solution for you, HarryGoldfarb - the age of consent should be 21, or maybe 25. Would you feel better?

Look, I may or may not agree with you, but I wasn't attacking you, so you do not need to resort to any form of counterattack. I just asked since I'm interested in your opinion. I never said "as many", that's your take on what I said but definitely not what I said. I said it's a fact... you used the "fact" card for your thesis so I used it for a simple reply. I wasn't taking any side on the matter (which obviously you didn't get it) so I'm not deffending a puritanic view on the matter. And what's with the recommendation of asking priests? I do not need the highest possible age of consent to feel better (????), but I still do not think you have answered the question (and you don't have to, of course).


.

I don't know what's the question honestly, and anyway, I'd like you to take A side.

Greg wrote:

HarryGoldfarb wrote:

ITALIANO wrote: ”I've met people who had sex much later in their life and they WERE traumatized for having waited so long”.
What does this mean? Maybe they were traumatized because the experience itself was traumatizing. Haven’t you met people who waited what might be considered a little too long and still have a perfect sexual life?

It was a joke but, needless to say, you didn't get it.

Even though it was a joke, it is possible that you have known people who were traumatized by having grown up as social outcasts, which led them to being unable to have sex until later in life.

No, and I'm not judging anyone. But the view most members of this board have of sex is, I think, really scary, so my reaction may be sometimes a bit tough. But I really feel like I am surrounded by extraterrestials here

ITALIANO wrote:You don't understand. It's not just a fact - it's perfectly normal, usually not violent, and psychoanalysis doesn't consider it a sickness or a pathology. The simple truth is that, at 17 (and actually even a bit earlier) we are very sexual and often healthily so. The idea that a law should prevent people from having sex at such an age is objectively absurd, but if you think it's right, good for you. What's less good is that you can seriously think that as many people have sex at 12 (which is not true) and that it's the same thing. No, there is a difference between 12 and 17 (ask many Venezuelan priests). Anyway, I have a solution for you, HarryGoldfarb - the age of consent should be 21, or maybe 25. Would you feel better?

Look, I may or may not agree with you, but I wasn't attacking you, so you do not need to resort to any form of counterattack. I just asked since I'm interested in your opinion. I never said "as many", that's your take on what I said but definitely not what I said. I said it's a fact... you used the "fact" card for your thesis so I used it for a simple reply. I wasn't taking any side on the matter (which obviously you didn't get it) so I'm not deffending a puritanic view on the matter. And what's with the recommendation of asking priests? I do not need the highest possible age of consent to feel better (????), but I still do not think you have answered the question (and you don't have to, of course).

ITALIANO wrote:It was a joke but, needless to say, you didn't get it. So, since you asked, no, I don't think there is a "perfect" age one should start having sex. It's very personal, very individual.

Indeed, obviously I did not get it as a joke. Thanks for clarifying it...

HarryGoldfarb wrote:

ITALIANO wrote: ”I've met people who had sex much later in their life and they WERE traumatized for having waited so long”.
What does this mean? Maybe they were traumatized because the experience itself was traumatizing. Haven’t you met people who waited what might be considered a little too long and still have a perfect sexual life?

It was a joke but, needless to say, you didn't get it.

Even though it was a joke, it is possible that you have known people who were traumatized by having grown up as social outcasts, which led them to being unable to have sex until later in life.

HarryGoldfarb wrote:

ITALIANO wrote: Yes, but laws must generalize, and they can't be based on Sabin's - or other individuals' - sexual life. It's a fact, like it or not, that many have sex at 17. And they love it. And they aren't traumatized for life (but I've met people who had sex much later in their life and they WERE traumatized for having waited so long).

“It's a fact, like it or not, that many have sex at 17”.
Yes, it’s a fact... but just because it happens, laws must be made around this? It’s a fact too that “many” people have sex at 13, at 12...

You don't understand. It's not just a fact - it's perfectly normal, usually not violent, and psychoanalysis doesn't consider it a sickness or a pathology. The simple truth is that, at 17 (and actually even a bit earlier) we are very sexual and often healthily so. The idea that a law should prevent people from having sex at such an age is objectively absurd, but if you think it's right, good for you. What's less good is that you can seriously think that as many people have sex at 12 (which is not true) and that it's the same thing. No, there is a difference between 12 and 17 (ask many Venezuelan priests). Anyway, I have a solution for you, HarryGoldfarb - the age of consent should be 21, or maybe 25. Would you feel better?

HarryGoldfarb wrote:

ITALIANO wrote: ”I've met people who had sex much later in their life and they WERE traumatized for having waited so long”.
What does this mean? Maybe they were traumatized because the experience itself was traumatizing. Haven’t you met people who waited what might be considered a little too long and still have a perfect sexual life?

It was a joke but, needless to say, you didn't get it. So, since you asked, no, I don't think there is a "perfect" age one should start having sex. It's very personal, very individual. But - how shall I put it - it's a fact that we do have a sexual instinct since we are teenagers, and we rcome of age (intellectually, not just legally) at around the sane time, so... well, I don't understand those who repress their sexuality and postpone their first sexual experience for years and years. I don't know if it's exactly pathological - in many cases it is, but not always maybe. But it's definitely an act of selfishness. And fear. And you know what? Often, the ones who are more obsessed with sex are those who don't dare to practice it. For me it's normal and has been normal since I was 16 or 17. I'm glad that I didn't wait till I was 30. I'd be a different man today, and not a better one, I know it.

ITALIANO wrote: Yes, but laws must generalize, and they can't be based on Sabin's - or other individuals' - sexual life. It's a fact, like it or not, that many have sex at 17. And they love it. And they aren't traumatized for life (but I've met people who had sex much later in their life and they WERE traumatized for having waited so long).

“It's a fact, like it or not, that many have sex at 17”.
Yes, it’s a fact... but just because it happens, laws must be made around this? It’s a fact too that “many” people have sex at 13, at 12...

”I've met people who had sex much later in their life and they WERE traumatized for having waited so long”.
What does this mean? Maybe they were traumatized because the experience itself was traumatizing. Haven’t you met people who waited what might be considered a little too long and still have a perfect sexual life?

Sabin wrote: That being said, this wasn’t a mentally well person. She faked having cancer to get her family to reunite around her after she had drive them away, and when she couldn’t keep her lies up committed suicide by shooting herself in the head. It was only after they got the autopsy did they learn she was faking her cancer for a year. She was an alcoholic drug addict who wasn’t well. I think about her a lot. At 16 (17 in a few months), glassesed, braced, I wasn’t ready for a relationship with this person. When I said “perhaps,” I meant an STD, but that isn’t life-destroying. As a child of the 90’s, I confess I still do have some of that programming with me..

Well, ok, you are right - you did the right thing then.

Sad story and tragic woman.

Italiano wrote
Yes, but laws must generalize, and they can't be based on Sabin's - or other individuals' - sexual life. It's a fact, like it or not, that many have sex at 17. And they love it. And they aren't traumatized for life (but I've met people who had sex much later in their life and they WERE traumatized for having waited so long).
As for your friend's mother, I don't want to deprive you of the comfortable pain of potential drama, but... I must be honest with you. No, Sabin, it wouldn't have ruined your life, sorry. Countless young men lose their virginity with an older woman, and years later they remember the episode maybe with joy, maybe with some embarassment, but never with shock. It happens in every part of the world, in famous novels, in movies.
But only in America this absolutely normal experience is avoided with fear, because it could "ruin a life". Sabin, leave that country before it's too late. It's sick.

Does it sound like I’m relishing in the comfortable pain of potential drama? No, I’m guilty of two things: 1) accusing you of generalizing (of which there are worse crimes), and 2) oversharing.

That being said, this wasn’t a mentally well person. She faked having cancer to get her family to reunite around her after she had drive them away, and when she couldn’t keep her lies up committed suicide by shooting herself in the head. It was only after they got the autopsy did they learn she was faking her cancer for a year. She was an alcoholic drug addict who wasn’t well. I think about her a lot. At 16 (17 in a few months), glassesed, braced, I wasn’t ready for a relationship with this person. When I said “perhaps,” I meant an STD, but that isn’t life-destroying. As a child of the 90’s, I confess I still do have some of that programming with me.

Either way. This story is an overshare. Probably shouldn’t have done so. But I felt like sharing so up it stays.

Sabin wrote:

Italiano wrote
I mean, who DIDN'T have sex at 17?

Me.

That being said, my best friend's mother tried to sleep with me. I could say "propositioned me" or "tried to coerce me" but we can use whatever language we want. I turned her down. She persisted. Eventually it stopped. I don't feel traumatized. That being said, I do have a perennially sliding doors chapter in my life where I wonder what might have happened had I accepted. Such is life. I'm not so Pollyanna-ish to think it would necessarily ruin my life. I mean, perhaps. Perhaps not though. It would be years before I had sex (lol, too much time on this message board).

Why did I post this? To confess a trauma? No. Just to make the point that things are more complicated and confusing than one might generalize.

Yes, but laws must generalize, and they can't be based on Sabin's - or other individuals' - sexual life. It's a fact, like it or not, that many have sex at 17. And they love it. And they aren't traumatized for life (but I've met people who had sex much later in their life and they WERE traumatized for having waited so long).
As for your friend's mother, I don't want to deprive you of the comfortable pain of potential drama, but... I must be honest with you. No, Sabin, it wouldn't have ruined your life, sorry. Countless young men lose their virginity with an older woman, and years later they remember the episode maybe with joy, maybe with some embarassment, but never with shock. It happens in every part of the world, in famous novels, in movies.
But only in America this absolutely normal experience is avoided with fear, because it could "ruin a life". Sabin, leave that country before it's too late. It's sick.

Italiano wrote
I mean, who DIDN'T have sex at 17?

Me.

That being said, my best friend's mother tried to sleep with me. I could say "propositioned me" or "tried to coerce me" but we can use whatever language we want. I turned her down. She persisted. Eventually it stopped. I don't feel traumatized. That being said, I do have a perennially sliding doors chapter in my life where I wonder what might have happened had I accepted. Such is life. I'm not so Pollyanna-ish to think it would necessarily ruin my life. I mean, perhaps. Perhaps not though. It would be years before I had sex (lol, too much time on this message board).

Why did I post this? To confess a trauma? No. Just to make the point that things are more complicated and confusing than one might generalize.

Don't forget the hush payment paid to Eliza Dushku over the harassment she received from Michael Weatherly on the set of Bull.

Make that five.

I forgot the Harvey/JLaw rumblings.

There are four 'sex' scandals in the news at the moment being reported in the news in my part of the world:

Geoffrey Rush;

Woody Allen/Mia Farrow (yet again for the up tenth time in nearly 30 years);

Hugo Weaving's niece quitting some U.S. TV show;

A local federal politician who'd I'd never heard of who is part of the right wing and a morals campaigner who got caught out using taxpayer's money to take trips to Hong Kong to meet up with some 'sugar baby' he meet online.

I lead such a boring life.......and I'm glad I do.