Actually, another poster in another thread...

... gave links to woman describing their youthful sexual experiences, and it seems fairly clear that pre-pubescent girls can indeed orgasm. I guess that "hypothetical" person speaking about "hypothetical" girls in "hypothetical" sexual situations just had some "hypothetically" bad luck, because that "hypothetical" person in "hypothetical" situations with"hypothetical" boys had, "hypothetically" speaking, no problems bringing those "hypothetical" boys to orgasm. And those "hypothetical" boys would have "hypothetically" loved it, too. And "hypothetically" they would have come back for more and more. Yours in an interesting description, though, too. The "hypothetical" person speaking about "hypothetical" situations with "hypothetical" pre-pubescent boys in "hypothetical" sexual encounters didn't notice that with the "hypothetical" pre-pubescent boys the responses were very different from more non-hypothetical adult responses. "Hypothetically" speaking, of course. Yes, your views on the other comment are welcome. Just that BL'ers may not get into it so much. The topic was being discussed. Our bad... ;-) I think everyone who can orgasm should do it as much as they want, assisted and/or unassisted by anyone of any age. The operative phrase being "as they want", of course. Just because someone *might* be forced, on the rare occasion, is not sufficient reason to lock up about three-quarters of a million people, often for the rest of their lives, in the U.S. who were not involved in coercive situations. And done in the name of "saving the children". The chance of a child being kidnapped and raped in the U.S. is about the same as the chance of that child being struck by lightening. And *that's* a fact.