Article written by

tigtog (aka Viv) is the founder of this blog. She lives in Sydney, Australia: husband, 2 kids, cat, house, garden, just enough wine-racks and (sigh) far too few bookshelves.

23 Responses

Page 1 of 1
  1. Helena
    Helena at |

    This is repulsive. I’m really struggling to wrap my mind around the absurdity of his position. Not to mention, the AVERAGE age of onset of puberty for girls is in the early teens, but some girls start puberty earlier than that as young as 8. Also, the average age of onset of puberty has been getting earlier, for non-evolutionary reasons! So just. WHAT.

  2. Deborah
    Deborah at |

    I’ve read them about four times now, and I find them repulsive.

  3. Cindy
    Cindy at |


    I find this discussion interesting. I was sexually active from age 13 and my very liberal parents made sure I new about birth control. I don’t for a moment regret the sense of freedom and power I enjoyed but I do now resent that fact that I was technically a criminal.

    I think I was about 7 when I first rode my bike to school on a public road; an activity that was far more dangerous than my sexual activity.

    My experience made me a sex positive feminist. I gave my own children the same knowledge and freedoms I enjoyed as a child and I have no regrets, nor do they if I may take them at their word. Tens of thousands of other pubescent young people are likewise sexually active in Australia without an epidemic of 13 year old mothers.

    The OP also loses me with this statement: “He’s also losing me on the idea that the current legal age of sexual consent has anything to do with Christian morals in particular.”

    It is common knowledge that the age of consent was pushed up in the 1800s and early 1900s in many Western jurisdictions to about where they are they are today (other than for gays) mostly on the back of Christian womens groups’ campaigns like this.

    The increase in the age of consent was progressive in the 1800s, when children sold themselves for sex in the slums of London and Paris and patriarchy was rarely challenged. But I think today sex-positivist feminists ought be listened to, even if mainstream feminists choose to disagree.

    Thanks for your time.

  4. SunlessNick
    SunlessNick at |

    I don’t know what to say to that except for making puke noises.

  5. Megpie71
    Megpie71 at |

    Okay, this nincompoop seems to have forgotten the one clarifying factor about homo sapiens sapiens which differentiates us from the majority of other species on the planet: we stopped relying on genetic evolution as our sole evolutionary path back around about the time our distant ancestors first figured out fire. Instead of waiting around down the generations for our genotypes to adapt to the environment around us, we use our cultural abilities to alter our environment to suit our phenotypes. We build shelters, we farm, we create complex organisational structures to feed large numbers of people, and yes, we figure out ways to delay breeding until the majority of individuals have learned enough about the culture they’re living in to be productive members of that culture. We create rules about who can breed with whom in order to avoid chronic inbreeding within small genetic pools, and figure out ways of creating sanctioned and unsanctioned breeding pairs (or in other words “married” and “unmarried” couples). We also think up rules about what would be right and wrong about various types of sexual activity.

    We stopped listening solely to our genes long ago. Why would we be taking their parameters as gospel now?

  6. Jo
    Jo at |

    Not to mention the implication that being ‘sexually mature’ equals giving consent to sex. Because, you know, that’s all that females are really there for, right?

  7. Jorick
    Jorick at |

    Yo, can you cite the exact chapter and page where you found that quote? I’m running a search engine through an e-book copy and can’t find that quote…

  8. Jenyck Smith
    Jenyck Smith at |

    Err… I’m looking for any part of that quote in the book and I haven’t found anything. Where did you/they find that one?

  9. Edward
    Edward at |
  10. Satini
    Satini at |

    He never said anything remotely similar. This is the book :

    Maybe you could edit an apology or similar.

  11. Aqua, of the Questioners
    Aqua, of the Questioners at |

    I was looking at I think some UN stats a few years ago, and globally, the leading cause of death for 15-19 year old women is pregnancy/ birth. Risk of death per pregnancy is much higher for under 15s, but not enough get pregnant that young for it to be one of the leading causes of death.

    From what I remember, the risk of death or serious injury drops dramatically enough from the 15-19 to 20-24 age group that my takeaway was “we should do everything we can to support or encourage women to not get pregnant until they’re 20.”

    For myself, I thought I’d stopped growing at 13-14, and I was a quite reasonable “adult” size, but then I had this extra growth spurt around 20: another few cm in height and a re-proportioning of my waist and hip measurements, which I now totally think of as becoming mature enough for pregnancy, even though I’d had periods since I was 11.

  12. angharad
    angharad at |

    I definitely stopped growing when I was 14 (and started menstruating when I was 12), but there were still changes going on after that – in physique and in my reproductive system.

    Given that we now know that human brains don’t completely mature until the early 20’s (most particularly in the decision making areas), I wonder why we don’t see all these naturalistic fallacy numpties suggesting that no one gets to choose to have sex (or drink, or drive, or choose a career, or whatever) until they are 25..?

  13. Pitchguest
    Pitchguest at |

    So, tigtog, you wrote a blog post attributing the words purportedly written by AA, looked at it and chose to publish it without verifying its authenticity. And so did PZ, and two other bloggers at FtB.

    You people are so adorable. But I wouldn’t go as far as to call you good sceptics. In fact, I’m pretty sure you’ve crossed the line to full-on dogmatists.

  14. Steve Watson
    Steve Watson at |

    Why is this still up? What I want to see is “Post deleted because I was flat out wrong.”
    Your link for “plentiful documentation of dodgy crap” goes to the top of this site.
    Putting “TheAmazingAtheist” or “Kincaid” in your search box returns only this post.
    On the evidence you and your readers are no better than the people you criticize.

  15. Mindy
    Mindy at |

    What I want to see is “Post deleted because I was flat out wrong”.

    *snort* That isn’t a standard I have noticed being adhered to on many blogs, some of which take particular pride in being flat out wrong. I don’t see why we should be held to a standard no one else bothers with.

Comments are closed.