Joseph Epstein on the generic nature of teenage males:

I have a special regard for studies that tell us that the way to reform calls for changing human nature. This study, apparently, also demonstrates that there is probably no such thing as a bad bully, that behind every bully is a lonely, confused boy, frequently ill-adjusted….Boys, surely by now everyone knows, are brutes. Between the ages of 12 and 18, no matter what their other achievements, they are chiefly interested in sex and talk about sex, in devouring large quantities of unhealthy food, and in playing games at which they can outwit, triumph over, and otherwise humiliate their fellows. Boys exist in a near Hobbesian state of nature. Modern life isn’t, thank goodness, nasty, brutish, and short. But boys, given free rein, would make it so. (“B is for Boy -and Bullies,” WSJ, 4-30-2000)

Generally, this is true, but with many exceptions, of course, including myself, in regard to bullying. And I was not a brute nor are myriads of other males ages 12-18. And males in their 20s are just as “interested in” and obsessed with sex both in their fantasies and in practice, especially as adults from age 18 on and often as adolescent “minors,” an interest and obsession that last into their 30s and 40s and 50s and 60s and beyond with the aid of Viagra and similar drugs.

And in regard to brutes and bullies, most of what he says is just as true of most males in their 20s and many who are older and brutes and bullies even in their 40s and 50s and 60s and beyond, e.g, military officers and jail and prison guards and police and coaches and bosses and fathers.

And a large minority of males are not only bullies and brutes but low-IQ savages and predators and psychopaths, violent and recidivist criminal who commit aggravated assaults, muggings, armed robberies, burglaries, acts of vandalism, home invasions, torture, rape, gang-rape, murder, etc., especially as teenagers, or even younger, beginning at puberty, and in their 20s.

And not “everyone” knows that boys are “brutes” by nature. Not the authors of the study he mentions and not CSA victimologists, obviously, and virtually all feminists and left-liberals/”progressives,” who believe the actions of boys and men are purely or largely an effect of male socialization which can be mitigated or abolished by egalitarian and enlightened socialization. Nor MRAs, the misogynist lunatics of the soi-disant “men’s movement, who are obsessed with proving that males are as good or better than females and that females are as bad or worse than males and just as abusive and violent or potentially abusive and violent.

To CSA victimologists, biological men under age 16 or 18 (and even 18-year-olds if the women is a teacher or tutor like Abigail Simon) who are “chiefly interested in sex and talk about sex” and who often talk of wanting to  have sex with adult females -what heterosexual adolescent doesn’t fantasize about having sex with adult females, e.g., various celebrities, teachers, neighbors, strangers, their mother’s friends, etc.- must be protected from such women by draconian/Orwellian punishments, the enactment and enforcement of laws and policies to prevent the realization of their fantasies.  Or, for those few who “get lucky,” to end the intrigues, and the “victims” gratification, by crucifying the women who gave them the sex they craved and enjoyed.  Or to ruin their lives weeks or months or years after the affair or tryst ended when the “victims” are now adults but still “traumatized,” “scarred for life” by sex they assented to or initiated, knowingly and willingly, in some cases by force and/or threats, and enjoyed far more than the women who “raped” and “molested” them.