[NT] HELP ME CONSTRUCT AN ARGUMENT.

[Snow Turtle]

I never said that the mother forced the child to suicide, just illustrating what depths a fragile young mind can sink to at the hands of a manipulative adult. I agree about lack of family support, which is why I suggested that the child's parents be informed of this.

Key word being manipulative.

Don't know how stable or loving it is, but I can guess that he'll look back on it and will think it was creepy, at best. Again, would you feel this way if a 26 year old man formed a romantic relationship with a 14 year old girl? A kid barely out of junior high? Can you truly see nothing disturbing about that? And furthermore, this woman encouraging a child to sneak around and lie to his parents for 2 years is not responsible, healthy behavior for a normal adult. She clearly has mental issues and is clearly unstable. They catch people like this on television shows for a reason.

At the very least his parents should know about this (or any girlfriend), even if you don't think it's morally or legally wrong for the relationship to continue.

Well alright, it's an assumption to say that it's a loving and stable relationship but to be fair that applies both way. Nobody can make concrete judgements because they aren't involved in the situation and lack all the details.

Does the women clearly have mental issues? Is she really unstable?
How can you conclude that based on just a paragraph? I'm sure N's can appreciate the uncomfortable feeling of being viewed as crazy by society because they don't neccessarily adhere to social norms. It's possible that she's just an extremely idealistic women who believes love conquers all.

I'll admit that I'd be slightly iffy about a 26 old man with a 14 year old girl. But personally I believe that's because I've been conditioned to think so by society. In the same manner I'd be disturbed with incest, however I personally believe that these people aren't bothering anybody and that there is no real reason to condemn them apart from disgust based on nothing.

To be honest I find it more sad than immoral that the women has to encourage the child to hide their relationship until a later age. (Obviously she will have to come out at some point.) To me it just reflects more on society not being able to deal with this sort of behaviour, rather than the couples themselves.

Now if the parents and society could handle the information maturely that'd be okay. BUT reality is extremely different as shown here.

 

[Snow Turtle]

I actually know of a girl, who at 14, met a man on the internet in a chat room. He disclosed his true age (40), and they formed some sort of relationship which carried on for more than a year. The girl was truly in love. They decided to meet, at a motel, and they had sex. When the girl became pregnant, she had to tell her parents, who then freaked out. When all was said and done, the man was arrested, and it came out that he was an ex-convict (sexual predator) currently wanted in 2 states for the same damn thing. Even presented with this proof the girl stood by her man, claiming love. It wasn't until she saw the actual emails to the other girls, the same ones he sent her with only the names replaced, did she finally understand how she was manipulated and coerced. She ended up not having the baby, but does have a case of herpes to remind her constantly (and yes, she could've gotten that from another teen - age has nothing to do with it). She is 19 now and is still very scarred from this. But if you had asked her at 14 or 15 if she was happy, she would have said yes.

You keep specifically using examples where the adult in the relationship is clearly manipulative and has dark agendas. What about the other side?

Personally I think that's immoral that the man formed a sexual relationship with her, but that's only because he did so before she was technically legal. The relationship mentioned in the OP is a different case, the women waited until the boy was legal. Would you be happy if she waited until he was 18? Surely by then he'd be able to form his own decision.

What age would you have found it acceptable for this relationship to occur? You argue that his youth had been stolen. What about early 20s(20/21/22) who get together with early to mid 30s?

 

[Snow Turtle]

On a sidenote rant:

We keep on going on about these children being fragile, but to be honest... there are so many children who understand these concepts intellectually and are already engaging in such relationships. Society really does create this impression that the older person will always be the one manipulating.

 

[Kalach]

Again, would you feel this way if a 26 year old man formed a romantic relationship with a 14 year old girl?

Elvis did.

Petite, there's your argument.

 

[jenocyde]

Kai, if you think that the child has a love which is so much more mature than his parents' and all of society's understanding, then I can see why you would disagree - because in your eyes, love conquers all. If you see nothing wrong with romantic relationships between adults and children (other than from social conditioning), then I am not going to convince you otherwise. I don't know your age, gender or background, but I truly hope that if you have children (now or in the future), that you protect them to the best of your ability. I'm not going to go any further with this conversation. Thanks for the honest sparring!

 

[Lasting_Pain]

i know someone who is a 28 year old woman dating a 16 year old boy in a different state. She claims they are in love and are soulmates and they've been dating almost 2 years but they waited to meet until he was of legal age of consent (thats what she says anyway).

There is no reason to argue. This relationship is mutual, if you are arguing against the relationship, you are only risking losing friends. As long as the couple is in love and are willing to wait for him to reach the proper age, then there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Colors]

I agree with Jenocyde, on both issues, but Petite_Etoile, I repeat my response. Why should convincing your boyfriend be on any importance? If you truly believe it to be harmful and dangerous (and by what you've said, it sounds that way), they do something about it. Whether or not your boyfriend backs you up, or bows down intellectually to your argument is moot and petty.

 

[Petite Etoile]

I agree with Jenocyde, on both issues, but Petite_Etoile, I repeat my response. Why should convincing your boyfriend be on any importance? If you truly believe it to be harmful and dangerous (and by what you've said, it sounds that way), they do something about it. Whether or not your boyfriend backs you up, or bows down intellectually to your argument is moot and petty.

this has just been really hard on me and even though he is really considerate and supportive, i just wish he could understand me 100%..

In regards to "doing something about it," someone turned her in to the police a few days ago, but she got the best lawyer in the state so she probably won't go to jail or anything.. which is fine because i never wanted her to get punished, mostly i just wish she would realize what she's doing is wrong or to seek help.

 

[Colors]

I think it's hard to accept A LOT of the time that people, perfectly reasonable people, to boot, will disagree with us when the same evidence is placed before us. Maybe it's different experiences that have shaped us internally, maybe they're just approaching from a different angle in that particular instance at that particular time.

That's why laws exist, I think. So we have a standard regardless of people waffling, situational blahblah. And that's why juries exist, so that we have the human waffling in there too.

Sounds like a difficult time for you, and I'm not good at relationships to tell you how to communicate your sentiments to your boyfriend. (In that there's a difference between disagreeing with someone and thinking they are wrong.)

When I was in high school, a teacher was arrested for sexual relations with several students. He was a really good teacher but what he did was indeed manipulative and violative.

 

[Kangirl]

I don't think this is anyone's business but their own (the 2 people involved). If I'm correct in assuming he's of legal age at 16 then there's not even a legal issue anymore.

And, given no other info apart from ages I wouldn't necessarily change my mind if it was an older man/younger woman pairing.

 

[Kalach]

I think we can agree that Elvis is the King. He grew fat and lazy and died with an impacted colon. He hadn't pooped for weeks.

I think we can agree that Priscilla is the Queen. She couldn't act worth a damn and had odd facial surgery to keep her youthful looks.

See what you condemn these two love birds to? The woman, 28, seeks a power imbalance. The kid, 16, doesn't have the backlog of experience a man 10 years his senior would. So he is attractive. And will remain so? Whatever is immature in the woman needs what is immature in the kid. Hopefully she recognises it before she is addicted to colon therapies.

I assume everyone in his story is American? Perhaps some sweaty Las Vegas footage would be instructive.

On second thoughts, no to the Las Vegas thing. They may get ideas and end up married.

 

[Colors]

Ah yes, but why do laws exist? They fall not out of the sky, but are set up to fulfill a purpose in society- to cover an issue. Just because the WORD of the law has been bypassed, doesn't make the issue the law is meant to address go away.

 

[Kangirl]

Yeah, I'm not going to get into this one again either, but as stated in a previous thread, I don't have a problem with mutual relationships between post adolescent human beings, of either gender, and older human beings, regardless of the 'legal age' wherever they are. I do not see these relationships as inherently abusive, not do I see either party as inherently manipulative or exploitative.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

I actually agree. I don't think it's that big a deal, as long as the older person isn't totally crazy and the younger person seems somewhat mature. Not my effin' business who wants to be with whom.

 

[Into It]

i couldn't decide where to post this at first, but i decided here since NTs are supposed to be good at arguing. anyways, i'll get to the point.

i know someone who is a 28 year old woman dating a 16 year old boy in a different state. She claims they are in love and are soulmates and they've been dating almost 2 years but they waited to meet until he was of legal age of consent (thats what she says anyway).

My ENTP boyfriend who argues just to argue, says that it's ok they are dating and no one should really try to stop them because even though its wrong, they are not hurting anyone and are happy.

i think this will have a major impact on the child as he is not emotionally and psychology developed. Just because the woman is stubborn, doesn't make it okay for people to just sit with their arms crossed because the couple is happy.

My ENTP boyfriend is pretty open and quick to change his mind, but his main argument is that he believes people should have the freedom to do what they want to do if they are happy and they are not hurting anyone.


SO--- People who AGREE with me: what flaws can i find in his argument to make him see that there SHOULD be intervention and if someone reported her maybe she should even go to jail and that she SHOULD get help and counseling even if she claims to be happy.

To a degree, we all have our personal freedoms that are not impinged on by government or social stigma: some would say we have too many freedoms, others would say we have too few.

But it is not his argument that must be broken down first- it is yours. There is a reason that you cannot construct a decent argument even though an INTJ should be able to excell at that sort of thing. It is this: If you believe in your right to think she is wrong, you must equally respect her right to think she is right. If you disagree with this maxim, you're either irrational or narcissistic.

So the question should really change from "How can I construct an argument that will make someone else adopt my views?" To "What can I do to be at peace with this reality?"

 

[Costrin]

SO--- People who AGREE with me: what flaws can i find in his argument to make him see that there SHOULD be intervention and if someone reported her maybe she should even go to jail and that she SHOULD get help and counseling even if she claims to be happy.

So I didn't read the thread and stuff, and I also disagree, but here's my thoughts anyway:

You shouldn't take this stance. The way you worded this, it seems you think it is wrong, and wont consider the arguments of people from the opposing position. This is the wrong mindset for entering a debate.

Especially your use of "should". If you want to convince the other person, then you need to absolutely 100% justify why they "should" do this. If you can't do that, then I suggest you don't use this wording. Instead of saying what they should and should not do, perhaps suggest possible consequences of their consequences, suggest possible other courses of action.

Overall, I think your best attack route, would be the age of the child, and how the child may be hurt. I wouldn't bring up the law as a main point. I would find as much research as possible and throw it at your opponent. Numbers and statistics would be much more convincing than anything else you could say.

Basically, just keep in mind that the burden of proof is on you in this case, and that you must justify your position, not the other way around.

 

[professor goodstain]

I'll bet it all ends in some sort of gun violence somewhere down the line.

 

[Petite Etoile]

So I didn't read the thread and stuff, and I also disagree, but here's my thoughts anyway:

You shouldn't take this stance. The way you worded this, it seems you think it is wrong, and wont consider the arguments of people from the opposing position. This is the wrong mindset for entering a debate.

Especially your use of "should". If you want to convince the other person, then you need to absolutely 100% justify why they "should" do this. If you can't do that, then I suggest you don't use this wording. Instead of saying what they should and should not do, perhaps suggest possible consequences of their consequences, suggest possible other courses of action.

Overall, I think your best attack route, would be the age of the child, and how the child may be hurt. I wouldn't bring up the law as a main point. I would find as much research as possible and throw it at your opponent. Numbers and statistics would be much more convincing than anything else you could say.

Basically, just keep in mind that the burden of proof is on you in this case, and that you must justify your position, not the other way around.

i worded it the way i did because i wasn't looking to enter a debate at all. My boyfriend and i haven't been fighting about this or anything like that, but we have discussed it a lot already, and i didn't care to debate it with people here because i've already considered and discussed everyone's arguments with HIM.

Unfortunately, a lot of people have decided to simply disregard that statement and argue against me anyway..

 

[Costrin]

i worded it the way i did because i wasn't looking to enter a debate at all. My boyfriend and i haven't been fighting about this or anything like that, but we have discussed it a lot already, and i didn't care to debate it with people here because i've already considered and discussed everyone's arguments with HIM.

Well imo, it seems as if you maybe think that you've heard all the arguments and positions, and they aren't up to par. Of course, there is always the possibility that there is some new information or perspective that you may have missed.

Though, I suspect you realize this. Possibly this is an P/J communication difference.

Unfortunately, a lot of people have decided to simply disregard that statement and argue against me anyway..

Not unexpectedly, really.

 

[Snow Turtle]

Not unexpectedly, really.

It was fun arguing with the others on the board. Apologies for hijacking the thread when it was obvious you weren't looking to start a debate.

I think Into its right has the right idea.

There's very little chance that he'll change. While he may understand other point of perspective, it's not really going to affect his final decision on the matter. The best way is to target his core beliefs that support this...

a) His belief that the boy is emotionally mature enough. That the women is sane. Find evidence to contradict either statement.

b) Find a 'normal' adult-child relationship that reflects how individuals might feel after breaking up. Whether they feel exploited etc

It's difficult because... You're essentially asking him to view from the perspective that all adult/children relationships will be exploitive. What are his core beliefs that support the whole thing? Is it a let and let live mentality?