(no subject)

[emmagrant01]

There's an interesting discussion going on over on wickedcherub's LJ about the morality of adults ogling and squeeing over pics of adolescents. My thoughts are here.

Comments

[helens78]

Hm. Well, I think it's interesting seeing moral judgments based on hard numbers, considering that 14 years old wasn't always the age we think of today. My body was ready to start popping out babies at the age of 9. I might not have been a sexually mature woman by any stretch of the imagination, but logicistically, physically speaking, I was capable of producing living human offspring at age 9. Five years later, my bone structure was set pretty much into what it is today, so at 14, I could've been giving birth as often as my womb could manage it without being worried about what actual childbirth would do to me, hip-wise and body-wise.

There's been a strong urge toward "protecting" children from sexuality for some two, three hundred years or so. But it wasn't always illegal to lust after or even marry people who were 14 years old. There have been points in history where 14 and 16 year olds were heads of households, where you got married at 16 and started a family right away (or got married at 16 because the family was already in the making).

So to me -- putting a hard number on sexuality seems outright stupid. Some people are sexually mature at 14, some aren't going to hit that point until their mid-40s. What's questionable is whether these kids are sexually mature humans being marketed as such, or whether they're sexual adolescents being marketed as sexually mature in order to sell movie tickets. I seriously doubt anyone's asked them, and they might or might not have an answer even if they did.

I'm not personally comfortable lusting after Daniel Radcliffe, though I've been saying for three years now that he's going to be fucking sexy as hell when he's all grown up. But so what if other people are lusting after him? Lust isn't action. (Of course, I make an argument that fanfic isn't action, which is why I don't have a moral problem with RPS, chan, or chan RPS.) Calling it "wrong", though -- hm. I think it's an interesting attempt at impressing modern moral strictures on people. I'll say that. There is no biological commandment that says Thou shalt not lust after 17-year-olds. However, on their 18th birthday, it is moral and proper. It's all societally-based, and I think kids age at their own rates, regardless of how fast or slow parents or society would like them to.

Now, whether being allowed to age at their own pace is feasible, common, and how much damage parents do by trying to speed it up or retard it (or in this case, society/publicists/parents/etc.), that's an interesting question. But when it's a debate where people aren't saying things like "This makes me uncomfortable", they're saying "This is WRONG", or where the word "pedophilia" is getting slung around? That's not debate or a discussion, that's lecturing. It just makes me wonder when JF is going to come up because you know it's gonna lead to an entry on Fandom Wank. *g*

[emmagrant01.livejournal.com]

Well, I think it's interesting seeing moral judgments based on hard numbers, considering that 14 years old wasn't always the age we think of today.

That's true, isn't it? Thirteen is the traditional age of adulthood in Judaism, and in many cultures, children are considered adults once they get to the point that they can reproduce. Even fifty years ago in this country, we considered people above the age of 18 to be (actual) adults. Now we think they're far too young to get married and start families! My grandfather had a younger sister who got married at thirteen, and her husband was definitely an adult.

Now, I'm not advocating these sorts of relationships. In fact, I think that the delay of adulthood is great for kids. However, in our culture, in which children have access to a tremendous amount of information, that seems more and more difficult to continue.

There is no biological commandment that says Thou shalt not lust after 17-year-olds. However, on their 18th birthday, it is moral and proper.

LOL! So true! I was 17 when I met my husband, and he was in his mid-twenties. There was an undeniable attraction there, and we acted on it. We didn't worry as much about the legal issues of the age difference as we did keeping our relationship secret from my parents (who would've freaked if they knew I was fucking any guy, regardless of his age). We'd been dating 8 months before I turned 18. I was ready for that relationship at 17. My point is, I agree completely that those lines are arbitrarily drawn. (Isn't the age of consent 16 in the UK?)

My interest in this discussion comes from the fact that I really believe that most people who've been making these comments about these actors are like me in that they aren't really being serious. (And this brings up the old issue of coming across differently in electronic fora than you would in RL.) Someone said that she's reliving her "Tiger Beat" days by squeeing over Dan Radcliffe. I'm SO doing that! I'm interested in him in the same way I was interested in the guys in Duran Duran when I was 13. And, incidentally, in the same way I lusted after Ewan McGregor over the last year.

It isn't real, and I know that. I don't want it to be real. I'm not getting sexual gratification out of it. It's something else altogether.

Thanks for joining in! I'm curious as to why you didn't post this over where the discussion is happening?

[kyuuketsukirui.livejournal.com]

I am procrastinating, so of course I'm wandering around making random comments. :p

Good points about 13, 14, 15 year olds being married and heads of households in the past. Thing is, kids were a lot more mature mentally then, too. They were expected to be able to take care of themselves and run a farm or what have you. There are a lot of teenagers today who can't even make themselves a sandwich because their parents do everything for them. Most kids lead a life of going to school and playing video games and have no concept of what the real world is like. To me it's that emotional immaturity more than anything that makes it impossible to be attracted to any of these kids.

[helens78]

Ahh -- good point about mental/emotional maturity. You could make a case for child stars both having more mental/emotional maturity points than the average teenager (because of having more responsibility, a job, being better able to see consequences of their actions if tabloids are following them around and their image takes a hit) and less maturity points (because they're also somewhat protected from the consequences of their actions and they don't run in the same social circles as average teenagers, necessarily). Definitely a conundrum there.

[inyadreems.livejournal.com]

Fascinating discussion, thanks for pointing to it. I'm not a HP fan (sorry - I know, but I'm just not), and I'm a very much grown woman, but I have seen photos of the kids and thought... they're getting nicer. And I've always just thought "I can look, nothing wrong with that". No, real kids don't do anything for me - they're horrible. But the cleverly designed posters and promo stuff for HP is made to look attractive - not just for the legions of young fans, but for adults too.

So... you got me thinking. And that's a good thing.

[emmagrant01.livejournal.com]

But the cleverly designed posters and promo stuff for HP is made to look attractive - not just for the legions of young fans, but for adults too.

Yes, exactly. I know enough about advertising and graphic design to recognize that all of this is intentional on the part of the publicity people at WB. They know what they're doing.

I know what I mean when I say that Dan looks hot in a picture (like my icon, for example), and I'm completely aware that I'm being played by people who want my money. And it's working! But I have to say I resent people presuming to think that I (or someone like me) would actually jump that kid given a chance. That's SO not what people are saying!

[primroseburrows.livejournal.com]

I think that recognising that a handsome young man is, well, handsome, is normal and natural for everyone. I really have no problem with minor droolage and tongue-in-cheek Bad Place stuff. If it goes further than that (like the poster on who used the word "molest"), it's over the top. And. I'm speaking as not just someone in the fandom, but as the mother of a not-quite-fifteen-year-old son.

If someone came up to me and told me that my kid is attractive and grown-up for his age and boy, is he gonna be a handsome man someday, and that if she/he were fourteen she/he would be mad over him, I'd probably take it as a compliment. If this same person told me that she/he wished my son would "molest" them, no matter how humourously it was said, I'd be horrified.

There's a line here, and maybe it's a fine one, but. As a parent, I can tell when it's been crossed when I read it, no matter how tongue-in-cheek it was meant.

That said, Daniel's a very grownup-looking handsome young man, and my inner fourteen-year-old has a mad crush on him. *G*
(Reply to this)

[emmagrant01.livejournal.com]

That said, Daniel's a very grownup-looking handsome young man, and my inner fourteen-year-old has a mad crush on him.

Mine too! You know, when I was 13, I was completely and utterly in love with John Taylor from Duran Duran. I had posters of him all over my walls, and my friends and I talked and squeed over him and the other boys in the band. I even wrote NC-17 Mary-Sue fanfic about the band (starring me and my friends, of course), and passed it around in a notebook at school! He was at least twice my age then, and I knew that if I ever met him in person, absolutely nothing would happen. He was a completely safe guy to have a crush on, and to practice falling in love with. Little girls do that, and big girls occasionally like to remember what it felt like to innocently squee over a gorgeous guy.

[coconutswirl.livejournal.com]

Off-Topic: I live in Denmark where the legal coming-of-age is 15 -- and when I remember what I was like at 15, I am puzzled to hell. I certainly wasn't ready to .. er .. when I was around 15, bt YMMV.

On-Topic: What really squicks me is watching middle-aged ladies screaming and waving signs whenever Dan Radcliffe appears. Had it been 52-year-old men doing the same with Emma Watson, there'd be an outcry.

[emmagrant01.livejournal.com]

What really squicks me is watching middle-aged ladies screaming and waving signs whenever Dan Radcliffe appears.

*shudders* Seriously! I honestly can't imagaine doing that for any celebrity, let alone someone half my age! It embarrasses me to see it on TV to the point that I have to look away.

Thoughtfulness

[daiseechain.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the pointer. It's great to see actual debates rather than flame wars on the nature of fandom. Wish I could find more of it. er... not necessarily on this particular topic though.

Re: Thoughtfulness

[emmagrant01.livejournal.com]

Yes, it is interesting, isn't it? I'm glad that it's an actual discussion, and not a major wank.