On the Sexualization of Young Girls

[DutchLiberal]

29. No, some people are trying to ignore and reject biology because it doesn't fit their narrative.

It's a reversal of facts; a deliberate attempt to block out any proven data that conflicts with a pre-determined ideology. The cognitive dissonance sometimes reminds me of conservatives, who also insist that teenagers never get interested in sex by themselves, but it's always something from 'outside' which gets morally bad ideas into their heads.

Decades ago, it was said that rock 'n' roll made otherwise good and wholesome boys and girls into sex-crazed teens. Elvis 'the Pelvis' was the source of evil, corrupting the clean minds of young people with filthy thoughts. Before Elvis, boys and girls in high school would never even have thought about sex! There is no sexual drive! People don't have the urge to procreate! We do not feel the need to preserve the species! We're not mammals!

Saying that pictures and videos of dressed up, good looking, sexy young girls are the reason why teen boys and grown men look at them and are attracted to them, is exactly the same as a conservative saying sexual education in school is the reason that teenagers start experimenting with sex. If you do not acknowledge the biological fact that girls develop mature sexual body features from age 12-13 up, start getting their first period, thus become ready for child-birth (again, strictly biologically speaking) and THEREFORE, as a consequence of this, start to get interesting to men of all ages... you are denying science. You are denying facts. No amount of ideologically injected claims of moral superiority will chance that.

Long before there was anything like mass media, older men have been with young(er) girls for thousands of years. If you think that's not due to biological or evolutionary causes, then what is the cause? There were no videoclips, photoshoots or 'Hannah Montana' in ancient Rome, Athens or Egypt. There was no Disney cartoons or teen singers during the Middle Ages or the Renaissance.

People have NOT "become convinced that teenagers acting like hypersexualized caricatures is somehow a natural behavior for them, and grown men's fixation on them somehow biologically predetermined." YOU and others have become convinced that biology is used as an "excuse" by men to lust after young(er) girls/women. The "excuse"-narrative fits your ideology about 'the patriarchy' always and everywhere oppressing all women. The less contrived theory, that of human nature, doesn't fit that and thus has to be made to look suspicious...

Girs like older men, because they are more fit to provide for her and her offsping. Men like younger girls, because they are healthier and more likely to produce strong offspring. Has been that way for millennia.

I wish it could be a bit less black and white than that. I have done it up-thread and so have some other people. There IS real 'hyper-sexualization' in some cases, as I have pointed out above. But that's no reason to lump everything shown in the video together and label it all 'degrading or dehumanizing', because it is not. And it's also no reason to simply ridicule and mock basic scientific facts. I don't get why it always has to be either-or.