To be honest I think most of what you quoted above shouldn't be defended, and I already explained my thoughts on children vs. teens. To be honest with you I do not think the damage done when people have sex with the pre-sexual is "unsubstantiated". When I was in residential facilities I met, and dealt with, a lot of kids who were the result of such abuse, and as someone who was attacked by an older kid at the age of 6 let's just say even if my mind blocked out the details it has had a profound effect on me.WhiteNachos said:Why does that stuff need defending? It's fiction, who cares. The only possible arguments against it AFAIK are unsubstantiated claims about the real world effects of it or "I don't like it therefore it should be banned"Therumancer said:As far as the sexual comments you made above, that battle has already been ongoing to be honest, so it doesn't make for very good sarcasm. A lot of Japanese games and those made from parts of the world with much lower ages of consent have indeed run into problems with people getting upset about pedophilia or potential pedophilia. This is to say nothing of the "Second Life" battles over so called "ageplay" and people creating underage avatars and animation sets specifically to have sex and/or engage in virtual prostitution. The defense of which has involved things like how the person pretending to be a child isn't actually a child, so it shouldn't count... it's a giant mess, but the point is we've already seen this kind of thing as well.
I personally do not think there is any way to say having sex with an 8 or 9 year old is fine, or that someone of that age is even capable of understanding things to the point of giving informed consent.
Teenagers are different, as I explained my personal attitude on it is pretty much teens with others in their own general age group, I think adults and teens tend to be emotionally very different, despite how mature and worldly teens tend to see themselves. An adult can fairly easily exploit a teenager if they know what they are doing, and the damage done can be pretty extreme. While it's true some teenagers might be capable of an adult relationship, the overwhelming majority are not, but most probably think they are (which is half the problem). As laws and policies can't be subjective my basic attitude is that this is a no-no, and that if say some 40 year old and a 16 year old think they can have something, then waiting 2 years is probably a good way of proving it. When it's teen on teen, it's fairly parallel playing field, and your not going to stop it anyway (which is a big part of my thinking believe it or not, I'd rather give them condoms for example, than try and force hardcore abstinence and then have them all go around doing it anyway without them).
To be blunt, I personally have an issue with someone simulating a personal crime like this, say engaging in age play where the "fun" of it is to coax an underage child into sex behavior or something like that. Not to mention the damage such things are going to do if you succeed.
While opinions vary I feel there is far more detachment between say a general array of violent crimes, especially when exaggerated like in say "Grand Theft Auto".
Now, as an important exception I will mention that in the realm of pure fantasy exceptions can exist by the way they are defined. Piers Anthony is a good example of someone who likes to sell/push the envelope with this at times. Perhaps a good example some people might be familiar with is the whole "Pretty Sammy" factor. That is to say an alien or creature like a pixie, who happens to look child-like, but isn't actually a child, and isn't in the same process of emotional and identity development, and despite how it looks actually has a sexually developed body (ie no physical damage is going to be done by the act). While she has been defined differently due to all of the various version of the character and different "Tenchiverses" Pretty Sammy is a good example because she has been defined as being an immortal who is actually hundreds or thousands of years old and merely chooses to look like that with the body being a manifestation of what she wants to look like (please note this is not how she's always defined). If you take that definition of the character it's fair to point out that there is no real reason why she couldn't choose to enter into
a relationship or have sex with someone. Certain pixies, faeries, deity-type characters, aliens, etc... can all fit this definition. Piers Anthony once had a situation where a 4 year old (I think it was) had sex with an ice demon, but the 4 year old was "The Unicorn Adept" and being part unicorn aged by their standards and thus hit maturity astoundingly quickly despite having a rather dimuitive build, given that an "ice demon" in this world was basically a living construct of ice (like an elemental) they actually had to use magic to copulate if I recall... but as I said Piers Anthony does stuff like that just to mess with people I think. In Xanth (a different series, the other one was "Adept" series") he even got worse with things like "how do you get a winged centaur... well it turns out a regular centaur and a hippogryph both happened to both drink from the same love spring..." thankfully that was kept mostly to background details, but I still need brain bleach for it making me have to think of the mechanics of the act...
You might disagree with me, but as a general rule I see no real defense for having sex with the pre-sexual. I don't care if it's "fake" or not, I think it's just flat out wrong. The fantasy stuff above is not my cup of tea, but I can at least sort of accept it's right to exist when it's done correctly. When I say "done correctly" I generally mean involving characters/species that aren't supposed to be permanently locked into a permanent childlike emotional and mental state along with it, which still opens up all kinds of questions about exploitation. For example your typical fairy might be whimsical or whatever, but can suddenly get very serious usually and show it's age, and despite how she acted, the version of Pretty Sammy above was just acting, as it was made clear at her core she was quite ancient and quite mature. Basically a big part of this is "could this person knowingly consent to this, and understand it", a child, or someone who is on that level, pretty much cannot. Basically if I wouldn't trust a person to more or less conduct their own affairs and be able to take care of themselves because of their mental or emotional development, I would not trust their ability to consent to sex or pursue a relationship and they should be "off limits".
That's just what I think. It's why for example I'm very much against child porn, but feel that when it comes to comics and illustrations and such a depiction of something that might be underage and sexual shouldn't be banned outright, as it comes down to the context. An example would be say some of the classical depictions of cherubs or cupid which aren't banned because of context, which can also be applied to certain things like pixies and fairies. But on the other hand if your say dealing with porno comics dealing with little kids who are supposed to be little pre-sexual kids as opposed to something else that just looks that way and doesn't actually act childlike, then yeah, as far as I'm concerned drop the hammer.