Something odd I noticed

[cybotron]

Originally posted by jeffbert@Sep 15 2004, 01:04 PM
Huh? your statement makes little sense. The last sentence seems unrelated to those that precede it, and they make little sense. I have a minor in psychology, but never heard of a [b] neuropathic child brain. Please define this term. [/b]

How is it you don't understand my speech? Is it not because there is no Neuropathic Child Brain left in you?
I said quite clearly.
".....That's because of the maternal and parental command that
you must not look up a girls skirt.
This is the redirection of Psychic Power from the natural Hormone driven Psyche,
Into the rigid anti-hormone driven Psyche of thought control by Parental Surrogate.
The willful child, slave of Pop culture must be broken. The Taboo of "Sex thought" is used like a hammer in all thought control. To beat the neuropathic child brain into rebellion against it's parents, and into obedience of the parental surrogate... The State, The University Curriculum. The Japanese don't use "Sexual Terror" as the basis of Elementary Child Education. ...."
What is there not to understand?

[jeffbert]

Originally posted by cybotron+Sep 16 2004, 01:55 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (cybotron @ Sep 16 2004, 01:55 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--jeffbert@Sep 15 2004, 01:04 PM
Huh? your statement makes little sense. The last sentence seems unrelated to those that precede it, and they make little sense. I have a minor in psychology, but never heard of a [b] neuropathic child brain. Please define this term. [/b]

How is it you don't understand my speech? Is it not because there is no Neuropathic Child Brain left in you?
I said quite clearly.
".....That's because of the maternal and parental command that
you must not look up a girls skirt.
This is the redirection of Psychic Power from the natural Hormone driven Psyche,
Into the rigid anti-hormone driven Psyche of thought control by Parental Surrogate.
The willful child, slave of Pop culture must be broken. The Taboo of "Sex thought" is used like a hammer in all thought control. To beat the neuropathic child brain into rebellion against it's parents, and into obedience of the parental surrogate... The State, The University Curriculum. The Japanese don't use "Sexual Terror" as the basis of Elementary Child Education. ...."
What is there not to understand? [/b][/quote]
Ok, let me see if I can rephrase your statement. However, because you did not draw attention to any particular part of my statement, I take it that that this response of yours addresses my final paragraph. Therefore, first I reprint the last paragraph of my own statement:

But, even then, pre-adolescent boys have very little natural interest in girls, & boys usually do not become interested until puberty. They literally want nothing to do with girls between the ages of 6 or 7 and the onset of puberty.

• 1. “That's because of the maternal and parental command that you must not look up a girls skirt.”
• 2. “This is the redirection of Psychic Power from the natural Hormone driven Psyche, Into the rigid anti-hormone driven Psyche of thought control by Parental Surrogate.”
• 3. “The willful child, slave of Pop culture must be broken. The Taboo of "Sex thought" is used like a hammer in all thought control.”
• 4. “To beat the neuropathic child brain into rebellion against it's parents, and into obedience of the parental surrogate... The State, The University Curriculum.”
• 5. “The Japanese don't use "Sexual Terror" as the basis of Elementary Child Education. ...."

My rephrase:

• 1. Parents demand restraint. Boys must not look under girls' skirts.
  
  • If this is somehow a response to my last paragraph, it fails miserably. Just as a 1 year old lacks the ability to realize that just because his mommy left the room, she did not therefore become non-existent, so too, a prepubescent boy has no natural sexual interest, period (I mean as far as contact with others goes). His body simply lacks the hormones in sufficient quantities to stimulate his interest. He may indeed be curious about girls’ bodies, but no more so than about other mysteries. Boys typically think girls are dumb because they are not boys. Why would anyone play with dolls rather than footballs? Even tomboys are no better than pseudo boys, and they therefore are scorned.
• 2. The child's natural tendency is to follow the leading of its brain chemistry. The state redirects this energy toward non-sexual activities. Thus, eventually when the brain chemistry dictates an awakening of sexual interest, ie, boys become attracted to girls, they must subdue their natural tendencies.
  
  • This statement somehow is given as an explanation for (1.), because it begins with “this is”. However, I do not see how the parental surrogate is responsible for the acts of the parents. Thus, your first two sentences have little to do with one another. Hence, my comment “your statement makes little sense.”
• 3. The pop-culture exacerbates this natural tendency by glorifying sexual activity. Society holds that sexual thoughts are taboo, & this taboo is used as a hammer in “all thought control.”
  
• 4. Society demands that people restrain themselves from following their natural tendencies. Thus, free-sex is discouraged. Because it is considered taboo, society uses this fact that it is considered taboo, to emphasize that one must not yield to it. The child’s brain that is in a state of immaturity is subjected to pressure to mature before its time, & to render obedience to the state, rather than to its parents.
• 5. This "Sexual Terror" as you call it, is not employed by the Japanese to control elementary school children.
  
  • What of it? You fail to state why this is significant. If you said that this explains the panties shot in Astroboy cartoon, then ok. I might disagree based upon the facts that I already stated (that there were several Shirley Temple films that showed her panties), but at least your sentence would clearly be relevant.

May I suggest that when you make a post, you first look it over carefully, & see if you think other people will actually understand it. Often, you assume knowledge that most readers simply lack. Hence, your responses may make sense to you, but others are baffled by them.

[cybotron]

Originally posted by jeffbert+Sep 17 2004, 12:24 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (jeffbert @ Sep 17 2004, 12:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -cybotron@Sep 16 2004, 01:55 AM
<!--QuoteBegin--jeffbert@Sep 15 2004, 01:04 PM
[b] Huh? your statement makes little sense. The last sentence seems unrelated to those that precede it, and they make little sense. I have a minor in psychology, but never heard of a [b] neuropathic child brain.  Please define this term. [/b]

How is it you don't understand my speech? Is it not because there is no Neuropathic Child Brain left in you?
I said quite clearly.
".....That's because of the maternal and parental command that
you must not look up a girls skirt.
This is the redirection of Psychic Power from the natural Hormone driven Psyche,
Into the rigid anti-hormone driven Psyche of thought control by Parental Surrogate.
The willful child, slave of Pop culture must be broken. The Taboo of "Sex thought" is used like a hammer in all thought control. To beat the neuropathic child brain into rebellion against it's parents, and into obedience of the parental surrogate... The State, The University Curriculum. The Japanese don't use "Sexual Terror" as the basis of Elementary Child Education. ...."
What is there not to understand? [/b]

Ok, let me see if I can rephrase your statement. However, because you did not draw attention to any particular part of my statement, I take it that that this response of yours addresses my final paragraph. Therefore, first I reprint the last paragraph of my own statement:

But, even then, pre-adolescent boys have very little natural interest in girls, & boys usually do not become interested until puberty. They literally want nothing to do with girls between the ages of 6 or 7 and the onset of puberty.

• 1. “That's because of the maternal and parental command that you must not look up a girls skirt.”
• 2. “This is the redirection of Psychic Power from the natural Hormone driven Psyche, Into the rigid anti-hormone driven Psyche of thought control by Parental Surrogate.”
• 3. “The willful child, slave of Pop culture must be broken. The Taboo of "Sex thought" is used like a hammer in all thought control.”
• 4. “To beat the neuropathic child brain into rebellion against it's parents, and into obedience of the parental surrogate... The State, The University Curriculum.”
• 5. “The Japanese don't use "Sexual Terror" as the basis of Elementary Child Education. ...."

My rephrase:

• 1. Parents demand restraint. Boys must not look under girls' skirts.
  
  • If this is somehow a response to my last paragraph, it fails miserably. Just as a 1 year old lacks the ability to realize that just because his mommy left the room, she did not therefore become non-existent, so too, a prepubescent boy has no natural sexual interest, period (I mean as far as contact with others goes). His body simply lacks the hormones in sufficient quantities to stimulate his interest. He may indeed be curious about girls’ bodies, but no more so than about other mysteries. Boys typically think girls are dumb because they are not boys. Why would anyone play with dolls rather than footballs? Even tomboys are no better than pseudo boys, and they therefore are scorned.
• 2. The child's natural tendency is to follow the leading of its brain chemistry. The state redirects this energy toward non-sexual activities. Thus, eventually when the brain chemistry dictates an awakening of sexual interest, ie, boys become attracted to girls, they must subdue their natural tendencies.
  
  • This statement somehow is given as an explanation for (1.), because it begins with “this is”. However, I do not see how the parental surrogate is responsible for the acts of the parents. Thus, your first two sentences have little to do with one another. Hence, my comment “your statement makes little sense.”
• 3. The pop-culture exacerbates this natural tendency by glorifying sexual activity. Society holds that sexual thoughts are taboo, & this taboo is used as a hammer in “all thought control.”
  
• 4. Society demands that people restrain themselves from following their natural tendencies. Thus, free-sex is discouraged. Because it is considered taboo, society uses this fact that it is considered taboo, to emphasize that one must not yield to it. The child’s brain that is in a state of immaturity is subjected to pressure to mature before its time, & to render obedience to the state, rather than to its parents.
• 5. This "Sexual Terror" as you call it, is not employed by the Japanese to control elementary school children.
  
  • What of it? You fail to state why this is significant. If you said that this explains the panties shot in Astroboy cartoon, then ok. I might disagree based upon the facts that I already stated (that there were several Shirley Temple films that showed her panties), but at least your sentence would clearly be relevant.

May I suggest that when you make a post, you first look it over carefully, & see if you think other people will actually understand it. Often, you assume knowledge that most readers simply lack. Hence, your responses may make sense to you, but others are baffled by them.
[/b][/quote]
See...? I told you ...U-R-Nutzzzzz.
Now if this is wrong, if your statement is in error.....
1. Parents demand restraint. Boys must not look under girls' skirts.
If this is somehow a response to my last paragraph, it fails miserably. Just as a 1 year old lacks the ability to realize that just because his mommy left the room, she did not therefore become non-existent, so too, a prepubescent boy has no natural sexual interest, period (I mean as far as contact with others goes). His body simply lacks the hormones in sufficient quantities to stimulate his interest. He may indeed be curious about girls’ bodies, but no more so than about other mysteries. Boys typically think girls are dumb because they are not boys. Why would anyone play with dolls rather than footballs? Even tomboys are no better than pseudo boys, and they therefore are scorned.


Sexuality in early childhoodThis article may help you overcome your delusion... Poor thing. :wahah: :wacko:

Read Chapter 3 of Freuds last book. You just attack what I say without rhyme or reasom....
Why would you make such false statements? This is a computer... I can refute your errors and distortions instantly with expert testimony. :wahah:

[Anapan]

OMG you're so full of yourself. Have you ever considdered that you might just be nuts? Your inane religious(?) banter on other threads sounds more nuts than almost any posts I've ever read in the 7 years I've been reading and posting on message boards. You can find links and books that purport to prove anything. I have to completely agree with jeffbert's comment on your posts making little or no sense (to me, and I'd wager most everyone else reading them). Almost everything you've ever posted here seems to be 90% BS. Shortly after you arrived I started skipping over your posts in order to only read everyone else's since yours usually seem to have little or no relevance to the subject matter (or anything, as far as I could tell). In fact I only skimmed over your last post since I saw the word Psychic several times. In short, your cryptic unwanted ramblings are making the board a less carefree and happy place than it once was.

I apologise for using this thread for yet another OT post but it's been coming for a long time and I'm kinda drunk so cybotron's overbearing ego and smug self-righteousness seemed to make this necessary for me to type now. I may have just initiated a flame war (hope not) and I also apologize if that happens. I'll attempt to bring my post on topic:

Talk about over-analyzation... Here's my thoughts on it (I haven't read much of this thread but Cybotron's last post pissed me off so I skimmed through it just now).
One word for that misty scene - Gratuitous - I'm sure it's aimed at older viewers.
Adult Japanese males are almost all preverted - or at least the ones who watch alot of anime are. It's likely a result of their strict upbringing and is a deeply ingrained part of Japanese culture. The guys who make anime know it and use it to sell their product. Despite Astroboy being a kids show, the animators know that a large part of their viewing audience is adult males who grew up with the 60's series and so they put in a bunch of panty shots (being adult japanese males themselves, they know what their audience wants). Since that type of thing is so common on TV in Japan (so-called "ecchi" isn't really frowned upon) the show is made to appeal to as much of the population as possible.
I don't think Neuro Phycho Psychic brainwaves, mind hammers, sex terror or repopulation are even remotely relevant or involved ... but that's just my opinion .

[adrian _68]

I didn't know that I can be educated here in the forums.

[astroboykickedmyass]

Originally posted by Anapan@Sep 17 2004, 05:43 PM
OMG you're so full of yourself. Have you ever considdered that you might just be nuts? Your inane religious(?) banter on other threads sounds more nuts than almost any posts I've ever read in the 7 years I've been reading and posting on message boards. You can find links and books that purport to prove anything. I have to completely agree with jeffbert's comment on your posts making little or no sense (to me, and I'd wager most everyone else reading them). Almost everything you've ever posted here seems to be 90% BS. Shortly after you arrived I started skipping over your posts in order to only read everyone else's since yours usually seem to have little or no relevance to the subject matter (or anything, as far as I could tell). In fact I only skimmed over your last post since I saw the word Psychic several times. In short, your cryptic unwanted ramblings are making the board a less carefree and happy place than it once was.

I apologise for using this thread for yet another OT post but it's been coming for a long time and I'm kinda drunk so cybotron's overbearing ego and smug self-righteousness seemed to make this necessary for me to type now. I may have just initiated a flame war (hope not) and I also apologize if that happens. I'll attempt to bring my post on topic:

Talk about over-analyzation... Here's my thoughts on it (I haven't read much of this thread but Cybotron's last post pissed me off so I skimmed through it just now).
One word for that misty scene - Gratuitous - I'm sure it's aimed at older viewers.
Adult Japanese males are almost all preverted - or at least the ones who watch alot of anime are. It's likely a result of their strict upbringing and is a deeply ingrained part of Japanese culture. The guys who make anime know it and use it to sell their product. Despite Astroboy being a kids show, the animators know that a large part of their viewing audience is adult males who grew up with the 60's series and so they put in a bunch of panty shots (being adult japanese males themselves, they know what their audience wants). Since that type of thing is so common on TV in Japan (so-called "ecchi" isn't really frowned upon) the show is made to appeal to as much of the population as possible.
I don't think Neuro Phycho Psychic brainwaves, mind hammers, sex terror or repopulation are even remotely relevant or involved ... but that's just my opinion .

post of the year

[cybotron]

Originally posted by Anapan@Sep 17 2004, 04:43 PM
Your inane religious(?) banter on other threads sounds more nuts than almost any posts I've ever read in the 7 years I've been reading and posting on message boards.  You can find links and books that purport to prove anything. 
I apologise for using this thread for yet another OT post but it's been coming for a long time and I'm kinda drunk so cybotron's overbearing ego and smug self-righteousness seemed to make this necessary for me to type now. Talk about over-analyzation...  Here's my thoughts on it (I haven't read much of this thread but Cybotron's last post pissed me off so I skimmed through it just now).
One word for that misty scene - Gratuitous - I'm sure it's aimed at older viewers.
Adult Japanese males are almost all preverted - or at least the ones who watch alot of anime are.  It's likely a result of their strict upbringing and is a deeply ingrained part of Japanese culture.  The guys who make anime know it and use it to sell their product.  Despite Astroboy being a kids show, the animators know that a large part of their viewing audience is adult males who grew up with the 60's series and so they put in a bunch of panty shots (being adult japanese males themselves, they know what their audience wants).  Since that type of thing is so common on TV in Japan (so-called "ecchi" isn't really frowned upon) the show is made to appeal to as much of the population as possible.
I don't think Neuro Phycho Psychic (I said"The Neuropathic Child Brain and how an upskirts picture can cause distress and fear and even violent reaction.") brainwaves, mind hammers, sex terror or repopulation are even remotely relevant or involved ... but that's just my opinion .

Of course you must be right... And I apologise for my inane postings.
I enjoyed my education here @ astroboy online. What I learned I applied.
I enjoyed the Astro game... I knew there would be "spiritual " and " Mythos" aspects that many would not expect. The Demon possessed girl outside of Astro's house for instance. Why the need to have Astro casting out a Demon? I had to find out if anyone else saw these things coming.
I DID NOT post the upskirts pic. But it went down as I thought.
Jeffbert made a statement about human sexuallity. That was untrue, I gave a link to Sigmund Freud himself to refute. I was interested in making my Videos. And utilizing what I learned here. And I will.
But I promise... No more posts from me.
Astroboy has been cancelled, Only hardcore fans are left. I'll finish my color redo on the video streams.
The program was addressed to the "King Ranger" I got the message.
The rest of it is... Whatever. On a Psychic level.
Anapan wrote "...Adult Japanese males are almost all preverted - or at least the ones who watch alot of anime are...."
And Anapan is a Computer Super Genius..... And has one of the most powerful Cyber Pop interfaces i've ever seen. Any CYBER BRAT confronted by the ridiculous posting of Jeffbert, will run into the arms of Freud. It is Anapan.... Drunk and posting such a Diatribe that gives me pause.... Get a rope!!!! B) A diatribe that shows your mocking of my intelligence in a polorized light. I doubt half you guys made it to the "Tawashi distraction" in Astro PS2 without peeing your pants from Demon terror. Sex fear guilt.... Memories of Bully Terror, as your Neurotic Adult Brains crumbled and the ruins of your Neuropathic Child Brain began to be restored, you desired to play with the Real Astroboys. Lost in the Game without a clue, you wander around aimlessly. Trying to find whats it's all about.... What does it mean? You never saw the "Zoran Instruct." And you are frustrate. Because Astroboy is over your head.
Yet Anapan is A Super Computer Genius... You are not Ultra yet.
I love you guys. You should have given the kid a treat for finding Freud. Should have given him a contract and a nice advance for signing a development deal.
B)

[cybotron]

PS...
I finished the vid mix on #5.

[canuckboy]

Wow all that from astroboy.

One really interesting article ive read:

"Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments"

[jeffbert]

Originally posted by cybotron+Sep 17 2004, 12:55 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (cybotron @ Sep 17 2004, 12:55 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -jeffbert@Sep 17 2004, 12:24 PM

Originally posted by -cybotron@Sep 16 2004, 01:55 AM
[b]<!--QuoteBegin--jeffbert@Sep 15 2004, 01:04 PM
[b] Huh? your statement makes little sense. The last sentence seems unrelated to those that precede it, and they make little sense. I have a minor in psychology, but never heard of a [b] neuropathic child brain.  Please define this term. [/b]

How is it you don't understand my speech? Is it not because there is no Neuropathic Child Brain left in you?
I said quite clearly.
".....That's because of the maternal and parental command that
you must not look up a girls skirt.
This is the redirection of Psychic Power from the natural Hormone driven Psyche,
Into the rigid anti-hormone driven Psyche of thought control by Parental Surrogate.
The willful child, slave of Pop culture must be broken. The Taboo of "Sex thought" is used like a hammer in all thought control. To beat the neuropathic child brain into rebellion against it's parents, and into obedience of the parental surrogate... The State, The University Curriculum. The Japanese don't use "Sexual Terror" as the basis of Elementary Child Education. ...."
What is there not to understand? [/b]

Ok, let me see if I can rephrase your statement. However, because you did not draw attention to any particular part of my statement, I take it that that this response of yours addresses my final paragraph. Therefore, first I reprint the last paragraph of my own statement:

But, even then, pre-adolescent boys have very little natural interest in girls, & boys usually do not become interested until puberty. They literally want nothing to do with girls between the ages of 6 or 7 and the onset of puberty.

• 1. “That's because of the maternal and parental command that you must not look up a girls skirt.”
• 2. “This is the redirection of Psychic Power from the natural Hormone driven Psyche, Into the rigid anti-hormone driven Psyche of thought control by Parental Surrogate.”
• 3. “The willful child, slave of Pop culture must be broken. The Taboo of "Sex thought" is used like a hammer in all thought control.”
• 4. “To beat the neuropathic child brain into rebellion against it's parents, and into obedience of the parental surrogate... The State, The University Curriculum.”
• 5. “The Japanese don't use "Sexual Terror" as the basis of Elementary Child Education. ...."

My rephrase:

• 1. Parents demand restraint. Boys must not look under girls' skirts.
  
  • If this is somehow a response to my last paragraph, it fails miserably. Just as a 1 year old lacks the ability to realize that just because his mommy left the room, she did not therefore become non-existent, so too, a prepubescent boy has no natural sexual interest, period (I mean as far as contact with others goes). His body simply lacks the hormones in sufficient quantities to stimulate his interest. He may indeed be curious about girls’ bodies, but no more so than about other mysteries. Boys typically think girls are dumb because they are not boys. Why would anyone play with dolls rather than footballs? Even tomboys are no better than pseudo boys, and they therefore are scorned.
• 2. The child's natural tendency is to follow the leading of its brain chemistry. The state redirects this energy toward non-sexual activities. Thus, eventually when the brain chemistry dictates an awakening of sexual interest, ie, boys become attracted to girls, they must subdue their natural tendencies.
  
  • This statement somehow is given as an explanation for (1.), because it begins with “this is”. However, I do not see how the parental surrogate is responsible for the acts of the parents. Thus, your first two sentences have little to do with one another. Hence, my comment “your statement makes little sense.”
• 3. The pop-culture exacerbates this natural tendency by glorifying sexual activity. Society holds that sexual thoughts are taboo, & this taboo is used as a hammer in “all thought control.”
  
• 4. Society demands that people restrain themselves from following their natural tendencies. Thus, free-sex is discouraged. Because it is considered taboo, society uses this fact that it is considered taboo, to emphasize that one must not yield to it. The child’s brain that is in a state of immaturity is subjected to pressure to mature before its time, & to render obedience to the state, rather than to its parents.
• 5. This "Sexual Terror" as you call it, is not employed by the Japanese to control elementary school children.
  
  • What of it? You fail to state why this is significant. If you said that this explains the panties shot in Astroboy cartoon, then ok. I might disagree based upon the facts that I already stated (that there were several Shirley Temple films that showed her panties), but at least your sentence would clearly be relevant.

May I suggest that when you make a post, you first look it over carefully, & see if you think other people will actually understand it. Often, you assume knowledge that most readers simply lack. Hence, your responses may make sense to you, but others are baffled by them.
[/b]

See...? I told you ...U-R-Nutzzzzz.
Now if this is wrong, if your statement is in error.....
1. Parents demand restraint. Boys must not look under girls' skirts.
If this is somehow a response to my last paragraph, it fails miserably. Just as a 1 year old lacks the ability to realize that just because his mommy left the room, she did not therefore become non-existent, so too, a prepubescent boy has no natural sexual interest, period (I mean as far as contact with others goes). His body simply lacks the hormones in sufficient quantities to stimulate his interest. He may indeed be curious about girls’ bodies, but no more so than about other mysteries. Boys typically think girls are dumb because they are not boys. Why would anyone play with dolls rather than footballs? Even tomboys are no better than pseudo boys, and they therefore are scorned.


Sexuality in early childhoodThis article may help you overcome your delusion... Poor thing. :wahah: :wacko:

Read Chapter 3 of Freuds last book. You just attack what I say without rhyme or reasom....
Why would you make such false statements? This is a computer... I can refute your errors and distortions instantly with expert testimony. :wahah:[/b][/quote]
Much of Freud's psychoanalytic theory has since been proven false. However, in response to your assertions, I offer this URL :CHILD SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT. I do not agree with its entirety, mainly that there are stages through which children pass as they grow & develop, & some of the detals. Note, that this is based upon empirical data, that is, observations of children. Hence, it is based upon those cultures that were observed. Let me quote briefly a few words from the age 11 section: "Many girls are still in an anti-boy stage." I think it is safe to say, that boys feel similarly about girls, until the horemones begin to affect their thinking: From the same paragraph, "The more mature boys court and tease the developing girls... trying to see up skirts, etc." Note the use of the word 'mature'. This means that the horemones are present in large quantities. Here is a sentence from the age 9 section: "The love-hate vacillation between sexes at this age abounds with prepubescent energy." Yes, cybotron, kids normally segregate themselves according to their sex, until horemones dictate otherwise, during puberty (approximately ages 10-13 for girls, 12-15 for boys).

However, in regards to your source, note that it does admit that sexual activity in young children Middle childhood: Ages 6 - 9 is inspired by their observations of elders' behavior, or exposure to pornography. Hence, my assertion that the natural behaviors exclude contact. I am not comfortable discussing this in the Astroboy (family-friendly kid-safe) forum. Any further arguments ought to be private, although I see no sense in them, because you will remain unconvinced.

Note the sources we have employed. You use http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com, while I use Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, Volume 3, Feb. 1, 2000, written by "Dr Loretta Haroian, the cochair of the plenary session of Child and Adolescent Sexuality at the 1984 World Congress of Sexology, an expert on childhood sexuality" (her qualifications are according to http://www.jesus21.com/poppydixon/sex/kins...th_reisman.html). Granted, the article to which you refer, was based upon another article by Geoff Birky, whose qualifications are not stated, nor could I find them in a breif search, as I found those for Dr Loretta Haroian.