—All children in this country have the right to know their own body, to know that no adult can touch their body if they don’t want to, and that this is a form of violence. They have the right to know that they can love or have sexual relations with whoever they want, based, yes, on consent. And those are rights that are recognized and that you don’t like.
Since I did not go to a religious school, but to one of the Institución Libre de Enseñanza, since they spoke to me normally about sexuality in class when I was barely 11 or 12 years old, and since consequently I have not experienced that anachronism of single-sex education, I lack the traumas that eat away at the inside of that majority of Spaniards educated in religious centers. For a liberal like me, sex education should be a priority both in schools and, above all and above all, in homes. As long as heterosexuality is not implied to be anything short of a deviance. Heterosexuality is as normal as homosexuality or opting, yes, when you are a full-fledged adult, for transsexuality. Sexuality is freedom as long as, yes, it does not transcend the borders established by the Penal Code.
Irene Montero’s statements are a true psychological, psychiatric, moral and ethical aberration. To begin with, it is physically and metaphysically impossible for a boy or a girl to have full sexual relations for an elementary reason that even Abundio would understand: they cannot reach orgasm because they have not completed their hormonal development. That happens at puberty and adolescence, not before. A boy and a girl do not enter the stage of puberty until they are approximately 12 years old, until then they are interested in sexuality, they play, they browse, but they cannot consummate an act of this nature.
For a liberal like me, sex education should be a priority both in schools and in homes.
The intellectual indigence of the character leads him to commit such gross errors. Of course, we couldn’t expect more of this nothing either, that in an exercise of god-level machismo and nepotism, she came to a position, that of Minister of the Government of Spain, neither more nor less, which is six or seven sizes too big for her. Would she be there if she weren’t the alpha male’s mate? The answer is so platitude that I refrain from writing it.
The first question arises at the first change. When you state, Irene, that “no adult can touch a child’s body if [el niño] does not want”, what do you mean? That if the child accepts, the adult can consummate a sexual relationship with him? Or as? Or do you mean touching him strictu sensu? The context allows us to infer that he was referring to the former. She talked about what she talked about: sexuality. If we lean towards this alternative, we would be facing an apology for pederasty that can be prosecuted ex officio. Any sexual relationship of an adult with a minor under 16 constitutes a crime defined in article 183 of the current Penal Code, as it cannot be otherwise. An adult or an adult cannot sleep with a person who has not yet blown out the candles of 16 under penalty of ending up behind bars. They are from 2 to 8 years in prison. Spot. It would be convenient, Irene, for you to clarify yourself so that we can clarify it for the rest of us.
The second assertion is all the more serious. How do children “have the right to know that they can love or have sexual relations with whoever they want, based, yes, on consent?” A beardless person cannot share her sexuality “with whoever he wants” even if he has granted the placet, because if the other party is an adult that is pedophilia, disgusting and vomiting pedophilia. One of the worst crimes a human being can commit. I always say that a bastard who abuses or rapes a child is worse morally, even, than a murderer. Basically, because he destroys her life forever no matter how much psychiatric or psychological treatment she receives.
Any sexual relationship of an adult with a minor under 16 constitutes a crime defined in article 183 of the Penal Code
If the subject of the protagonist of this Sunday sermon had been a slip, she would have lacked time to rectify, clarify, add or contextualize. And we would all have understood it, we would all have forgiven her, her most tenacious adversaries would have kept silent, no matter how much she crucifies all the political and ideological antagonists who commit the slightest slip of hers, no matter how obvious it may be. The worst of all is that she has not said “Diego” where she said “I say”, which invites us to conclude that she either continues with the arrogance and arrogance of always or else she has nothing to rectify. Taking the thesis of the ruling for granted, it is evident that these episodes would not occur if this subject surrounded herself with professionals in the field: psychiatrists, psychologists and pediatricians instead of balls, friends, friends and friends whose functional illiteracy is even greater than yours.
All he did was give birth to the right on Friday, talk about hoaxes and manipulation with the servile and anti-journalistic help of the Ser network. Neither an apology, nor a mea culpa, nor a “sorry, I expressed myself wrong”. Come on, it must seem good to you that a beardless man has full relations with an adult. I, at least, am not going to give him the benefit of the doubt, nor am I going to interpret his words, among other reasons, because I am neither expected nor am I in his conscious or in his subconscious. He said what he said. More item: I don’t know if we are facing an evil, a brainless, an illiterate, a frivolous, a metepatas or all five things at once. His camera journalists, who are legion, will be able to say mass, but they won’t get us to guess that he didn’t say what he said because there hasn’t been any specification. I don’t want to think what would have happened if this vomit came from the mouths of Cuca Gamarra, Ayuso, Olona, Arrimadas or Monasterio. They would have had to emigrate to Australia, at the very least, dig a hole in the beach and hide for at least a decade until it cleared up. It is already known: the left has a bull and the right is guilty by decree law.