Poll: Abby or Jessica?

[Surfin' Santa]

Okay, somebody had to, so it might as well be me.

Which one do you think is cuter -- Abby Sunderland (left) or Jessica Watson (right)?

 

[RandyS]

Friends of yours?

 

[Brent]

Abby Sunderland

 

[OmahaStar]

They both look 12. Neither is cute.

 

[JarodRussell]

I think it's a very thin line this thread/poll walks on.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

Neither of them are 18, which makes this question gross.

 

[Dukat's Major]

Oh, a hot-or-not thread! Is this the meat market section of Misc?

EDIT: Actually, what's a "who's hottest" thread called? It's got to be some kind of meme, right? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

 

[Amaris]

Neither of them are 18, which makes this question gross.

While I think the question is in bad taste, I don't think gross is an accurate way to describe it. There have been plenty of threads about men/women turning 17/18 and salacious comments were quite often made in those threads without group condemnation. I would say it is impolitic and that it does fall into a gray area. Looking at it purely from a pragmatic point of view, the girls both have secondary sexual characteristics and display the ability to make adult decisions, which blurs the line of adulthood just a little. In two years they will look about the same as they pass the artificial line that we recognize as full adulthood. That said, they are still minors, would still be ethically wrong to pursue any type of intimate relationship with such, and it is definitely unwise to make a "Which one is hotter" thread.

 

[Surfin' Santa]

Neither of them are 18, which makes this question gross.

Or maybe it means you have a dirty mind?

I'm talking purely about their physical appearance. In any case, Jessica is of legal age in Queensland where she resides. And Abby will turn 18 in October 2011.

However, if there's anything at all inappropriate about what I consider to be an innocent little poll, the mods are free to move it to TNZ or to delete it altogether.

 

[Miss Chicken]

Neither of them are 18, which makes this question gross.

16 is legal in most places in the Western World.

 

[Dukat's Major]

Neither of them are 18, which makes this question gross.

While I think the question is in bad taste, I don't think gross is an accurate way to describe it. I would say it is impolitic and that it does fall into a gray area. Looking at it purely from a pragmatic point of view, the girls both have secondary sexual characteristics. In two years they will look about the same as they pass the line that we recognize as full adulthood. That said, they are still minors, and it is still generally unwise.

I think Shameless is allowed to think this is gross. Certainly the feeling of being grossed out doesn't exist in a vacuum -- i.e., it's subjective. I'm pretty grossed out too, a feeling for me which has both to do with their ages and the meat-market-y feel to the OP. Regarding age, it's less their technical legal status and more the preying-on-inexperience-and-extreme-youth vibe. I think nearly any parent of teenage girls knows what I'm talking about, even if your teen girls are older than 16...

 

[Amaris]

Neither of them are 18, which makes this question gross.

While I think the question is in bad taste, I don't think gross is an accurate way to describe it. I would say it is impolitic and that it does fall into a gray area. Looking at it purely from a pragmatic point of view, the girls both have secondary sexual characteristics. In two years they will look about the same as they pass the line that we recognize as full adulthood. That said, they are still minors, and it is still generally unwise.

I think Shameless is allowed to think this is gross. Certainly the feeling of being grossed out doesn't exist in a vacuum -- i.e., it's subjective. I'm pretty grossed out too, a feeling for me which has both to do with their ages and the meat-market-y feel to the OP.

Oh, certainly he's more than free to believe it is gross. I'm just stating why, even though he considers it gross, why there may be legitimate reasons others would not feel that way, and that those persons would not fall under any kind of social stigma for thinking such.

Personally, I find Abby to be adorable, but purely from a perspective of "Aw, isn't she cute/sweet?". I can, however, understand why others would see more.

 

[Trekker4747]

Being 16 or older both of these girls would be considered legal in many US states. (It ranges from 16 to 18.)

LINK

Both of these girls display the secondary gender characteristics that many people will find attractive (clear skin, breasts, curves, etc.)

That said, they're still, like, half my age, so...

 

[gturner]

California age of consent.

(A) An adult who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor less than two years younger than the adult is liable for a civil penalty not to exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000).
(B) An adult who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor at least two years younger than the adult is liable for a civil penalty not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000).
(C) An adult who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor at least three years younger than the adult is liable for a civil penalty not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
(D) An adult over the age of 21 years who engages in an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor under 16 years of age is liable for a civil penalty not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000).

I knew California was trying to raise revenue by taxing marijuana, but from these provisions it seems like they're trying to tax jail-bait as well. And note how rapidly the potential revenue drops as a girl matures!

 

[Brent]

Neither of them are 18, which makes this question gross.

16 year olds can't be pretty?

Ya know, saying someone is cute is not the same as saying I want to have sex with them which is not the same thing as having sex with them.

 

[Miss Chicken]

What if I posted a picture of two babies and asked which baby was cuter?

 

[sidious618]

Who are these people?

Edit: Ah, the around the world people.

 

[Brent]

18 for being legal to have sex with is just an arbitrary number man has applied, it actually doesn't indicate maturity at all, I know plenty of immature 20 year olds for example, and 16 year olds that are more mature than older "legal" people.

Besides, there is no law saying you can't state someone is pretty or cute that is under 18. The legal line of 18 is for sexual intercourse.

I don't see anyone in this thread saying they want sexual intercourse or trying to make that happen with these girls.

 

[Trekker4747]

What if I posted a picture of two babies and asked which baby was cuter?

It's called context.

I don't think the OP is asking who's cutest in the "baby waby" sense but in the "sexual" sense.

Which, granted, these girls are of age in many parts of the world and at the very least are in or past puberty (meaning any attraction to them is not pedophillia) but, still, finding either of them attractive on even a minorly sexual level is still somewhat on the "ick" side in much of the Western world.

...

Ok, fine, Jessica.

 

[Amaris]

18 for being legal to have sex with is just an arbitrary number man has applied, it actually doesn't indicate maturity at all, I know plenty of immature 20 year olds for example, and 16 year olds that are more mature than older "legal" people.

Agreed, which is part of the overall point I made.

Besides, there is no law saying you can't state someone is pretty or cute that is under 18. The legal line of 18 is for sexual intercourse.

I don't see anyone in this thread saying they want sexual intercourse or trying to make that happen with these girls.

I was answering on two fronts:

1] Addressing the issue in advance, because it was going to happen.

2] Answering Shameless opinion that the subject of the poll was gross. This gave the idea of intent, that the poll was anything other than using the term "cute" in a way that was considered innocent and non-sexual.