Don't do anything. What he does is his business and it obviously wasn't disrupting your life as you were unaware of it. At best just have a talk with him about safety procedures when performing bondage.
Or you could punish your child for being so sexual at such a young age. It's not your business what parents do to their children either, unless it's abusive. Children shouldn't have total privacy at that age, it's called parenting.
Let's look at this from a realistic perspective. How did the teenager get the equipment? Bondage is a rather expensive hobby. This means that the teenager is almost certainly above the age of sixteen with a car and a somewhat stable job. That alone doesn't make him an adult, not even close, but it does mean that he is entitled to some level of autonomy. In the original post the kid is twelve, true, but that is likely exaggerated for comedic effect, so I'm making it more relevant. On to my most important point...
Also, WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU?! You don't fucking punish someone for being "too sexual". That is a terrible idea and will only do more harm than good - if there is any good at all. This is extremely abusive! Children shouldn't have total privacy, but interfering in the sex life of someone when said lifestyle isn't a threat to themselves or others is a total invasion of privacy.
I decided to look at it from a more realistic perspective as this would likely apply to older teens more than kids, but my point still stands. It doesn't matter how old the kid is. All humans deserve the right to their sexual preference(s) as long as it does not inherently harm another human no matter what their age. I'll put an edit in my first post to make it more clear.
No such thing as too young - only too childish. Age isn't a good indicator of maturity. The maturity differences between males and females as well as the fact that maturity changes quite a bit. Being twelve is not enough by itself to limit him from pursuing what he wants. As long as he uses the proper precautions, there is no reason he shouldn't toy around with bondage. Disagree? Tell me why he's "too young" then.
Bondage is actually pretty mild. You're probably thinking of BDSM. BDSM is where it gets into dangerous stuff. The worst you'll see in bondage is restraints in odd positions.
▼
deleted
· 7 years ago
> there's never too young, only too childish
WHAT
WHAT THE FUCK
Also, he's not sexually developed yet.
Twenty year olds aren't sexually developed, but that's irrelevant. All healthy humans can obtain sexual pleasure be it a newborn or the oldest person alive. The pleasure can differ of course. It all depends on how you define 'sexual pleasure', but it is well known that toddlers will *ahem* grind on anything they can get their hands on when they realize that it feels good. A twelve year old will have almost certainly discovered this by now.
I'm not a pedophile myself, but I have read on the topic quite a bit because I have no life. I don't support child sex per se, but I know that arguments can be made for it just as I know that arguments can be made against it.
Underage sex? Well, as long as all members involved are either A) At the same level of sexual maturity or B.) Over the age of consent for their area then I have no issue. I think pedophilia is okay to have because it is not a choice. To say that it is not okay is synonymous with saying that being black is not okay because black people commit crimes. Most child sexual predator are in fact NOT pedophiles. Just like how being black doesn't mean you are a criminal being a pedophile does not mean you have ever or will ever act upon the urge to be intimate with children. One in twenty men are pedophiles, but that doesn't mean one in twenty men have sex with children.
When I was talking about "never too young" I was talking about saying someone is "too young" for something is a fallacy and was not about sex. How old you are has nothing to do with how well you can handle life. I've seen thirty year olds with the maturity of a sixteen year old and a sixteen year old with the maturity of a thirty year old. I was simply saying that calling someone too young to do something is a bad argument. Call them too immature or not developed enough instead.
I wouldn't recommend it. Why are you trying to take my words to their extremes? I made no mention of having intercourse with an underage individual. I merely said that they are capable of sexual pleasure. They are also capable of getting their legs broken, but that doesn't mean I wish for their legs to be broken. You are being intentionally dull.
Also, WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU?! You don't fucking punish someone for being "too sexual". That is a terrible idea and will only do more harm than good - if there is any good at all. This is extremely abusive! Children shouldn't have total privacy, but interfering in the sex life of someone when said lifestyle isn't a threat to themselves or others is a total invasion of privacy.
WHAT
WHAT THE FUCK
Also, he's not sexually developed yet.
Underage sex? Well, as long as all members involved are either A) At the same level of sexual maturity or B.) Over the age of consent for their area then I have no issue. I think pedophilia is okay to have because it is not a choice. To say that it is not okay is synonymous with saying that being black is not okay because black people commit crimes. Most child sexual predator are in fact NOT pedophiles. Just like how being black doesn't mean you are a criminal being a pedophile does not mean you have ever or will ever act upon the urge to be intimate with children. One in twenty men are pedophiles, but that doesn't mean one in twenty men have sex with children.
@famousone just doesn't like me.
I wouldn't recommend it. Why are you trying to take my words to their extremes? I made no mention of having intercourse with an underage individual. I merely said that they are capable of sexual pleasure. They are also capable of getting their legs broken, but that doesn't mean I wish for their legs to be broken. You are being intentionally dull.