That's what BigLutz is saying. We are arguing that the very act of wanting to engage in sexual activities with children is indicative of mental disorder.This all comes down to is that sexual feeling and prerfernce is ok untill you act on it, including incest, gay sex, rape, and all the like.
This is basically what you guys are saying.
This all comes down to is that sexual feeling and prerfernce is ok untill you act on it, including incest, gay sex, rape, and all the like.
This is basically what you guys are saying.
BigLutz, again you have gotten yourself caught in tiny details. Look at the big picture! There is something mentally wrong with paedophiles. Wanting to take advantage of the innocence of a child for your own sexual pleasure is not the process of a rational person. Abusing the trust between your position and that of the child's in order to take advantage of them is not rational behaviour. Feeding the child propaganda like 'if you tell anybody about this I will kill your brothers and sisters at night time' to keep it a secret is not rational behaviour.
You make the unfounded claim that most paedophiles do not act on their desires. I am at a loss to explain how you could possibly know this. Statistics indicate that there are many active paedophiles; the vast majority of paedophiles are never recognised because their victims, for whatever reason, do not bring it to light. Too often paedophiles were themselves molested as children and the behaviour is seen as an outlet - again this is typical of a mental disorder associated with repressed memories, shame, anger, low self-esteem and so on.
I'm still not 100% on incest being all good. There are biological mechanisms that are supposed to prevent sexual attraction within close family. If you don't feel repulsed by the thought of doing your brother/sister then there actually may be something not right in the cuckoo department.
Distance yourself from the relationship you have with this girl when you argue for paedophilia then. Clearly you cannot see the harm in it because you are blinded by friendship. Even she knows to be ashamed.You act as if all pedophiles actually go out and try to tempt children to go have sex with them. If a sexual orientation was only known for its crimes, are we to damn everyone in it?
As stated earlier in this thread and I have told Sunny privately I do have a friend who confessed last year that she did have pedophile thoughts but would never act on them, and that she feels very ashamed to even have them because of societal pressures. To my knowledge she has never been abused or molested but that these are thoughts she has had since puberty.
Perhaps. All I know is that a statistically significant number of people who are found to have sexually-abused children were themselves abused as children. Not necessarily by family members, ruling out a genetic basis for the behaviour.Remember your argument that a person is that way sexually because of molestation, abuse, repressed memories, etc etc. Has always been a poor argument for people who do not understand sexuality or wish to place blame on some one's sexual decisions on choices, not how they were born.
If rape is bad, the raping children can only be worse. However, pedophilia without rape is fine, as it does not harm anybody, similarly to homosexuality.
It is all well and good that she doesn't act on it. In fact we expect nothing less. That doesn't make paedophilia any less a disorder. I am not privy to the thoughts that she had but frankly I don't need to be. I can imagine neither a thought nor action which would be considered both paedophilic and one that does not inherently exploit a child. Not being repulsed by the notion of paedophilic behaviour is indicative of irrational thought processes.
I digress, once again. The fact is that paedophilic thoughts and actions inherently involve exploiting an otherwise innocent child. You cannot deny this. Homosexual thoughts do not [inherently involve exploiting people of the same sex].
No.
A child cannot consent. All paedophilia is wrong.
It can, actually. People should feel repulsed when the see someone vomit in front of them. People should feel repulsed if they see a plate of rotting meat covered in maggots. People should feel repulsed by the idea of a child being exploited for sex.There are numerous things we could be "repulsed" about in life, especially when it comes to one's sexual preferences. However that does not make it any more or less a disorder.
The difference is that there are legitimate ways the woman in the fantasy could have come to consent to the fantasy sex. How can you get a child to consent to sex in such a way? Through coercion in the most vile sense. People who imagine children consenting to sex in their fantasies lack the ability to think rationally. It CANNOT HAPPEN. Women, believe it or not, can and do consent to sex with the most unlikely of people. It is not impossible. The idea of a women having consensual sex with a man, or even a homosexual act, is not an impossible one, even if it is a fantasy. It would not necessarily have to be rape.Unless they act on it, how different is that from anyone walking down the street and fantasizing about having sex with the beautiful woman you see across from you? Obviously they would not have consenting sex with you, thus the only way would be rape. Just as pedophiles who may fantasize about the kids they walk by or see on TV would never have consenting sex with them. But again as I said that is fantasy, and fantasies are part of human sexual nature, if every human being were to go around acting on our sexual fantasies the world would be a hell of alot worse.
It can, actually. People should feel repulsed when the see someone vomit in front of them. People should feel repulsed if they see a plate of rotting meat covered in maggots. People should feel repulsed by the idea of a child being exploited for sex.
There are in fact some things that all healthy people should feel disgusted by. How healthy a species would we be if we did not have a biological response to the idea of eating our own shit?
The difference is that there are legitimate ways the woman in the fantasy could have come to consent to the fantasy sex. How can you get a child to consent to sex in such a way? Through coercion in the most vile sense. People who imagine children consenting to sex in their fantasies lack the ability to think rationally. It CANNOT HAPPEN. Women, believe it or not, may consent to sex with the most unlikely of people. It is not impossible. The idea of a women having consensual sex with a man, or even a homosexual act, is not an impossible one, even if it is a fantasy. It would not necessarily have to be rape.
A child cannot and will not consent to sex, not least with an adult. That is the difference which worryingly you too are struggling to make.
As I said, there are some things that all mentally-sound people should find repulsive. Enjoying S&M is not necessarily insanity material. Washing yourself in the blood of a freshly sacrificed litter of puppies is.People could also be repulsed by bukkae, rape fantasies, S&M and numerous other things, again though some may find those sexually attractive.
I notice you say 'almost never'. You might as well stop there.The thing is in both fantasies it is almost never going to happen with out coercion or force. But people do not think about it when they fantasize, they think of the person as a willing participant. If every person in the world began to break down their fantasies with reality, then they would cease to fantasize as the cold harsh waters of reality would wash it away.
The comparison to paedophiles has to be drawn because there are key differences between them.If I said I fap to loli now, would you hold it against me?
BTW, you can groom a child into 'consenting' into sexual activities, but the idea of it truly being consent is heavily debatable.
Also, can we actually talk about homosexuals?