Stacy McCain has just written a long piece about the latest gambit by the supporters of sexual predator Kaitlyn Hunt in their quest to get her out of the predicament she got herself into by having sex with an underage girl. It’s long, but well worth the read. He gives an historical perspective to how we got where we are today:
If you had to fix a date in history when the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s reached its Jacobins-and-guillotines stage, when even those who had originally welcomed and applauded the revolution began to recoil from the perverse “liberation” they had wrought, the 1978 release of Pretty Baby may well have been the pivot-point. The AIDS scare of the 1980s would accelerate the counter-revolution — in fact, the disease was already beginning to spread in the late 1970s, although it was not until the ’80s that the pandemic was recognized — but it was Pretty Baby and headlines about child pornography that alarmed American mothers about the encroaching danger to their daughters.
Of course, the slow approach toward this red line had been going on for many years, but it had occurred on the bohemian fringes of society and had escaped widespread notice by the respectable bourgeoisie. During the 1960s, there was a lot of talk about “high-school dropouts” and “runaway teenagers,” and plenty of minors — 15 or 16 years old, some even younger — were among the hippies and flower children who drifted toward San Francisco in the 1967 “Summer of Love.”
Tune in. Turn on. Drop out.
Whether they were seeking enlightenment and world peace, or just “sex, drugs and rock-and-roll,” there were plenty of young teens who were drawn into the hippie orbit. The anti-Establishment mood of that radical youth culture was such that no hairy freak was going to alert police — “the pigs” — that his dopehead buddy was making it with a teenybopper not yet old enough to get a driver’s license.
“Hang-ups” about sex? That’s for squares, man.
Funny thing, these anecdotes about rock stars having underage groupies…sex, drugs and rock ‘n roll…they didn’t get caught and if they did, you can be sure they would have paid the price. Roman Polanski had to leave the country to avoid prison and is still in exile because of his antics with 13 year old Samantha Gailey in 1977.
Aren’t we getting a little tired of people from other countries coming to America and trying to tell us how to make our laws and run our country?
How strange is it, then, that more than three decades after that zenith (or rather, nadir) of the Sexual Revolution, people like Canadian psychologist Marina Adshade thinks we’re in need of a social-science lecture on this topic?
The basis of the age-of-consent laws, like the ones invoked in this case, is that young adolescents are less capable of making healthy sexual decisions than are older adolescents because do not fully comprehend the risks. . . .
So there must be pretty good evidence that younger teens are less capable of making healthily sexual decisions than are slightly older teens who are free to choose the nature of their own sexual relationships, right?
Not exactly and, in fact, comprehensive research using data collected from 26,000 high school students in British Columbia found that the sexual decision making of those who became sexually active when they were 14 to 15 years old was no worse than those who became sexually active when they were 16 to 17 years old.
Damn you, damn your “research” and damn Canada, while we’re at it.
As a general rule, the more you know about social science, the more skeptical you are about its findings, especially when confronted with studies that seem to contradict common sense.
Common sense…imagine that. And what about Christian morals…or if you’re an Atheist, basic moral decency, something most people are born with. Even an Atheist has a conscience, knows right from wrong, even if they don’t believe in a higher power.
As Stacy says, the progressive movement is trying to blind us with science.