Tracy Hyphenated-Last-Name can snark all she wants but there's little doubt that immature sexuality and immature impulse control add up to the need to neutralize sexual signaling.

The adolescent male psyche sexualizes anything and will approach frenzy if properly stimulated. Be as PC as you like but Susie's little pants read "Juicy" and Johnny's got a raging boner and is on the edge of feral.

...your embattled mind is about to snap, isn't it?

I mean, spending all day clinging to every scrap of bullshit you can find to support the dogmas you've invested your whole victim-based psychology in? That probably stresses you out. Maybe it's time for a vacation, hon?

Neither boys nor girls under 18 are, emotionally, much more than talking apes with incredible sex drives. If TCF actually had teenage kids--in other words, if she knew what she was talking about--she would understand that most 14 year old boys resemble Spock in "ponn farr" and that girls who dress like that have some understanding of what that means for them. A cursory glance at some girls' Facebook or MySpace accounts will show you how aware they are of their own sexuality.

Only TCF's youth and ignorance excuse her for failing to understand what every teenage son's mom knows.

Hypersexualization of girls probably isn't any better for the relationship skills and opinions towards girls of boys than it is for girls. When boys develop hypersexualized ideas about girls and how they function in relationships, that's probably bad for girls, too, right?

Okay then, moving on.

Because when two teenagers are together and they are caught having sex, the girl's damaged reputation is so much worse than the boy going to jail.

"I honestly don't give a damm about those girls or their welfare. I'm actually freaked that my sons won't have any "decent" women to marry--and I won't get daughter-in-laws to woman-hate on."

Um, I'm still young enough to remember when I was 10 to hell... well now... got to say being "perpetually aroused" is NORMAL. Nothing has changed. Moving on...

Are boys not people too? Or do you think that women are the only ones who can be affected and molded by cultural influence? Are you implying that since we live in a male-dominated society, all males are some kind of sinister hive-mind, and thus adolescent and pre-adolescent boys are automatically perpetrators rather than victims?

"Society" is not a single-minded sentient entity, and certainly not one with a particular gendered viewpoint. You seem to be still operating in this turn-of-the century feminist mentality, as if at the highest rungs of society you will find an evil cabal of men plotting to keep half the population down. The reality is that all of us, men and women both, are born ensnared in a world of contradictory signals regarding sex and gender, which conditions the attitudes that we develop growing up.

This is why feminists need to stop interpreting gender relations through the lens of an arms race. A good example is "sex-positive" feminism and the whole "pro-slut" movement, which focuses on women emulating male promiscuity where, unlike any gender traits associated with women which feminists (correctly) point out are contingent and socially conditioned, this shallow hedonism is just assumed to be an essential male characteristic that neither has underlying societal causes nor can be changed. You seem to be making the same assumption in this article.

Would state that under no circumstances do they need to be protected from hypersexualized pubescent girls.

Young girls don't need to be hyper focused on how hot they are with padded bras, make-up, high heels and mid-drift shirts and young boys are amped up enough, it probably is hard for them when girls are flaunting and taunting them on purpose.

I personally if I have girls will not allow them to wear make-up, high heels or tight skimpy clothing. There is nothing wrong with regular ol t-shirts, jeans and sneakers unless it's a special occasion and it didn't harm me one bit to not be allowed to wear skimpy clothes or make-up. I still had an active dating life but I've never relied utterly on my appearance for approval either.

They have to go to jail if they have sex, the girls don't.

Also, they are on the hook for child support when their female teachers molest them - stupid!!

You're right, TCF, they're so lame!!

--in other words, if she knew what she was talking about--she would understand that most 14 year old boys resemble Spock in "ponn farr" and that girls who dress like that have some understanding of what that means for them.

I'm not sure you realize it, but you basically said that Ms Clark Flory is A) Too young to understand about teenage boys because she isn't old enough to have had them (I think you actually meant that part), but at the same token, B) Too old to know what teen girls think ad do.

I'm in my early thirties, so I am getting a bit too old to remember exactly what it was like to be a teenager, but I do remember my mid twenties, and I remember that at that point I did remember what being a teenager was like. When Ms Clark-Flory mentions that the actions of young girls may not actually be sexually motivated, she has more legitimacy then you because she probably can actually remember it.

You are seeing these young girls too much through your own boys eyes, and not enough through their own.

Just because Spock went into Pon Far, Nurse Chapel wasn't required to wear a less revealing uniform.

Do you two really believe that teenage boys will "go to jail" for having sex and girls won't? Please take and Introductory Criminal Justice class.

You might also be interested to know that the sentencing disparity in juvenile cases favors boys in general. But hey, don't let any facts get in the way of your determination to say something, ANYTHING negative about girls.

1) More sexual than you

2) More sexual than you "remember" being at whatever age we're talking about

3) More sexual than you want you kid to be EG. interested in sex before than have completed high school, college, and grad school.