Pedophilia

[BigLutz]

Like I said, it's not comparable. You need a fresh set of morals. Now, explain to me why killing is bad. Oh, what's that? You have a very poor explanation? That's what I thought. Simply put, there are certain things called "morals."

But you are applying "morals" to strictly scientific thought. Again I ask, when you strip out our concern for children, and boil it down to the base foundation what is so different between Homosexuality and Pedophilia? I am waiting...

 

[CSolarstorm]

And I do understand the "Think of the Children" rhetoric, but wouldn't it be fair to separate the rapist from those that live normal lives? I mean would it be right if we grouped rapist in with any other sect? It would be like grouping those that like Furries into the same with those that actually have sex with zoo animals.

Well like I said, dormant pedophiles are fine, and so are furries in that vein. I'd group both of those in 'risk for perpetrating rape' toward each of their subjects technically, although psychologists ask for furries to seek help less often probably because they aren't as concerned about animals as they are about children - we can talk about the injustice of that or pointlessness or whatever of that another time. The reason they do that is to help pedophiles lead normal lives, not to stigmatize them further.

To be clear, I'm not saying 'think of the children' myself, that's just incredibly corny. I'm just envisioning two steps ahead where this response leads to that, and I'm afraid that if the gender/sexual field does have such a PR nightmare, it turns into a reverse social revolution that makes more people misinformed and prefering to avoid progressive gender/sexual ideas than not. I like the way it is now in the DSM. If a pedophile isn't a) upset over their preference, b) getting into legal trouble because of it, then why not just leave them be? Heck, reality is stranger than fiction when it comes to my inner circle. I honestly do not mind and I am honor bound not to discriminate. But that doesn't mean making false equities and removing needed precautions to do that.

 

[Sadib]

Mind you I am only comparing it because I am detaching our emotion revoltion of a person having sex with a child. Take that away and what do you have? Some one who is physically attracted to a certain set of characteristics that make them unable to breed. How is that honestly different than Homosexuality? Or Bestiality? Or anything else outside of Heterosexual sex?

They are different, because eventually the child will be able to breed.

 

[BigLutz]

Well like I said, dormant pedophiles are fine, and so are furries in that vein. I'd group both of those in 'risk for perpetrating rape' toward each of their subjects technically, although psychologists ask for furries to seek help less often probably because they aren't as concerned about animals as they are about children - we can talk about the injustice of that or pointlessness or whatever of that another time. The reason they do that is to help pedophiles lead normal lives, not to stigmatize them further.

But if we do accept that Pedophilia is nothing more than possibly a mutation of genes, or genes going in the wrong order like pretty much every other sexual attraction outside of heterosexuality ( Again assuming that the basic purpose of sexual attraction is finding a suitable mate to give birth ). Then giving them all the psychological help in the world won't really change them.

To be clear, I'm not saying 'think of the children' myself, that's just incredibly corny. I'm just envisioning two steps ahead where this response leads to that, and I'm afraid that if the gender/sexual field does have such a PR nightmare, it turns into a reverse social revolution that makes more people misinformed and prefering to avoid progressive gender/sexual ideas than not. I like the way it is now in the DSM. If a pedophile isn't a) upset over their preference, b) getting into legal trouble because of it, then why not just leave them be?

Just a guess, but could it be that some Pedophiles believe they should be treated equally? That if they have something they cannot help and that is no different biologically than homosexuality, shouldn't it be given equal footing in scientific journals? I mean you are absolutely right that it is all about PR, and homosexuals will always trump Pedophiles and Furries and everyone else in PR sympathy. But I mean say for a second you are in their shoes, you have feelings you cannot control, you are stigmatized by society, and live in a world that basically would treat you like homosexuals were treated in the 50s if you "came out of the closet". Wouldn't even something as not being given equal footing in a scientific journal feel a bit unfair, to be called a disorder and homosexuals not?

I mean that is all I am looking at this position from, how would I feel if I had to watch one group be given priority over another based not on science but on PR. Wouldn't it feel like another slap to the face?

They are different, because eventually the child will be able to breed.

Except by then they are no longer attracted to the child because of the maturity of their body. Hell they would no longer even be called a pedophile scientifically if attracted to a child that is just starting puberty. They would be considered a Hebephile.

 

[Sadib]

Except by then they are no longer attracted to the child because of the maturity of their body. Hell they would no longer even be called a pedophile scientifically if attracted to a child that is just starting puberty. They would be considered a Hebephile.

So all pedophiles are only attracted to children?

 

[BigLutz]

So all pedophiles are only attracted to children?

If we are going by scientific terms, Pedophila is the sexual attraction to pre pubescent children. Hebephilia toward children beginning puberty, and ephebophilia toward children who are later in puberty. Now I am sure there are people who can be attracted to children and adults equally, just as gays can be attracted to both males an females.

 

[Celestial Moth]

What if the kid yes lol?

Dont take this out of context because i can see ow this can be misinterpreted.

 

[Iceberg]

That's a rather grim way to look at things. Imagine that there's a guy who has a crush on you, but you don't like him in return. According to your logic, the guy will eventually rape you and it's only a matter of time.

I see where you are coming from, but that's different. If a man was attracted to me, he would be attracted to women. Let's say I don't like him and turn him down. Eventually, he will have sex with a woman, not specifically me. And it may not be rape. Just as a serial killer might see you walking down a street one night (or even several occasions) and thinks about murdering you. Eventually he'll/she'll do it, but it may not be you.

Anyway, the over-arching point is that pedophiles (most) cannot hold their urges in forever. They will confront a child sexually.

What if the kid yes lol?

It would be like a severely intoxicated person saying yes, worse actually. While both the child and semi-conscious person may say "OK", neither are fully aware of what they are getting into. Legally, drunk people cannot give consent anyway. On top of that, children don't really know what sex is.

 

[Sadib]

I see where you are coming from, but that's different. If a man was attracted to me, he would be attracted to women. Let's say I don't like him and turn him down. Eventually, he will have sex with a woman, not specifically me. And it may not be rape. Just as a serial killer might see you walking down a street one night (or even several occasions) and thinks about murdering you. Eventually he'll/she'll do it, but it may not be you.

Anyway, the over-arching point is that pedophiles (most) cannot hold their urges in forever. They will confront a child sexually.

You're still sounding like men who don't have sex for a long enough period will eventually rape someone.

 

[CSolarstorm]

But if we do accept that Pedophilia is nothing more than possibly a mutation of genes, or genes going in the wrong order like pretty much every other sexual attraction outside of heterosexuality ( Again assuming that the basic purpose of sexual attraction is finding a suitable mate to give birth ). Then giving them all the psychological help in the world won't really change them.

The idea is not to change them, though. It's to train them to prevent themselves from acting their desires out, in order to keep the differentiation of pedophile and child molester, like marioguy says. That's why psychologists urge them to get help, so they can get help managing being themselves and living within constraint of the law. They can tell everyone around them and have their own culture and everything. Those are ideal conditions (except for the illegalization of child porn) by LGBT standards.

Just a guess, but could it be that some Pedophiles believe they should be treated equally? That if they have something they cannot help and that is no different biologically than homosexuality, shouldn't it be given equal footing in scientific journals? I mean you are absolutely right that it is all about PR, and homosexuals will always trump Pedophiles and Furries and everyone else in PR sympathy. But I mean say for a second you are in their shoes, you have feelings you cannot control, you are stigmatized by society, and live in a world that basically would treat you like homosexuals were treated in the 50s if you "came out of the closet". Wouldn't even something as not being given equal footing in a scientific journal feel a bit unfair, to be called a disorder and homosexuals not?

I mean that is all I am looking at this position from, how would I feel if I had to watch one group be given priority over another based not on science but on PR. Wouldn't it feel like another slap to the face?

If I was saying all this just because of PR, then yes, it would be terrible. And I know I got a little too passionate in acting afraid of that. Bad PR is just part of it though. I honestly believe pedophilia needs to be part of the DSM, because what good would the destigmatization be if more pedophiles sought psychological assistance just to be told there's nothing to help and they're fine the way they are? There is something solid psychologist need to do for pedophilic patients, and for them to do that, there needs to be a diagnosis. As a medical patient this is just how I think.

The tragedy of this is that I think that B4UAct did a very commendable thing by fostering a democratic system where pedophiles can be part of their own diagnosis. Like many amazing commendable things, it just happened to lead to something amazing in a bad way, in that the conversation cared more about about comforting its representatives then helping them deal with the truth.

 

[7 tyranitars]

If we are going by scientific terms, Pedophila is the sexual attraction to pre pubescent children. Hebephilia toward children beginning puberty, and ephebophilia toward children who are later in puberty. Now I am sure there are people who can be attracted to children and adults equally, just as gays can be attracted to both males an females.

That would make them Bisexual.

 

[Iceberg]

You're still sounding like men who don't have sex for a long enough period will eventually rape someone.

Not really. Since pedophilia is a mental disorder. You cannot resist a mental disorder forever. Saying a pedophile would never have sex with a child is like saying a psychopath would never hurt someone. Sure there is that small sliver of a chance that somewhere on Earth there is a pedophile/psychopath that hasn't acted on their urges. But the vast, vast majority have.

Also, heterosexual men have hookers and prostitutes to satisfy their sexual urges. Rape isn't about sexual desire either. The researchers in the above paper have concluded rape is about a man's desire to dominate women. Not their desire to have sex.

 

[BigLutz]

Not really. Since pedophilia is a mental disorder. You cannot resist a mental disorder forever. Saying a pedophile would never have sex with a child is like saying a psychopath would never hurt someone. Sure there is that small sliver of a chance that somewhere on Earth there is a pedophile/psychopath that hasn't acted on their urges. But the vast, vast majority have.

And you have proof to back this up? As if we are to assume that there are close to equal number pedophiles as there are those of any other group of sexualities outside of heterosexuality, then that means there are ALOT of children being raped with out us knowing about it. And also couldn't we also apply the Rape desire to pedophilia as well? That some people may have sexual desires toward children, but only act it on it because they know they can dominate them? Because I doubt there are too many children out there that would consent to sex.

 

[Metagross Guy]

Not really. Since pedophilia is a mental disorder. You cannot resist a mental disorder forever. Saying a pedophile would never have sex with a child is like saying a psychopath would never hurt someone. Sure there is that small sliver of a chance that somewhere on Earth there is a pedophile/psychopath that hasn't acted on their urges. But the vast, vast majority have.

Also, heterosexual men have hookers and prostitutes to satisfy their sexual urges. Rape isn't about sexual desire either. The researchers in the above paper have concluded rape is about a man's desire to dominate women. Not their desire to have sex.

My nigger WOMEN also rape.Dominating is a factor but some people just love to fuck or have a strong desire and just cant get a mate to endulge in and boom rape occurs. If theyre fucking psycho of course!

Someone once told me

"there is a pedophile in each and every one of use..."

May be true or is he a pedophile?

 

[Darkazure]

This is one of my rare posts in Debate and I'm probably going to get shot down real quick but bear with me.

Allowing homosexuality isn't the same as allowing pedophilia. They're two different things. Whether or not gay marriage is legalized or not doesn't make pedophilia any more ethical.

I agree homosexuality is defined as sexual attraction to the same gender. I don't see how that's related to the concept of being an adult attracted to young children are equivalent. think about it. It would be like not allowing kids to bring in phones to class rooms but allow kids to bring in laptops. what i'm saying is its the same topic but different issuses you see.

 

[Endolise]

That was my point, if you are going to have a diverse gene pool you are going to need everyone to contribute to it, thus you would need to pretty much force Homosexuals to have sex with the opposite sex or contribute a significant amount of sperm ( That is if we have refrigeration still in this absurd scenario ), to produce more babies and to have more diversity.

But they could still have sex with other gays, as long as they contributed to the repopulating group as well. Outside of donating the sperm, it really doesn't matter what gender they have sex with.

 

[Sadib]

Not really. Since pedophilia is a mental disorder. You cannot resist a mental disorder forever. Saying a pedophile would never have sex with a child is like saying a psychopath would never hurt someone. Sure there is that small sliver of a chance that somewhere on Earth there is a pedophile/psychopath that hasn't acted on their urges. But the vast, vast majority have.

It's no more a mental disorder than homosexuality is, which it isn't. The rest of your post is based on the assumption that it is a mental disorder. How can you even say that only a small sliver of pedophiles never acted on their urges? That must mean that you know how many pedophiles there are in the world. Being a pedophile in America is like being a homosexual in Iran, you don't share it with everybody.

 

[CSolarstorm]

It's no more a mental disorder than homosexuality is, which it isn't. The rest of your post is based on the assumption that it is a mental disorder. How can you even say that only a small sliver of pedophiles never acted on their urges? That must mean that you know how many pedophiles there are in the world. Being a pedophile in America is like being a homosexual in Iran, you don't share it with everybody.

Well marioguy, give us proof that it isn't. We've offered up documentation and educated reasoning, but you just keep restating your opinion over and over without support, yet you're questioning our assumptions. Okay - pedophilia is a sexuality. How do you expect people to talk about a sexuality and leave out any comments about the people in that sexuality who actually have their preferred sex? It's absurd. Most of us are making the distinction between dormant pedophiles and active pedophiles. You're the one that doesn't seem to want to.

 

[Kaiserin]

It's no more a mental disorder than homosexuality is, which it isn't. The rest of your post is based on the assumption that it is a mental disorder. How can you even say that only a small sliver of pedophiles never acted on their urges? That must mean that you know how many pedophiles there are in the world. Being a pedophile in America is like being a homosexual in Iran, you don't share it with everybody.

Which is why it's very likely that, when they bottle that feeling up and don't get any help with it, it's much more prone to backfiring on them and causing them to act on that desire. That's when it becomes irreversibly inappropriate, regardless of where one draws the line before then.

Like I said, a lot of people who wind up committing similar heinous crimes have this same problem. They wind up shuttering up a small seedling of an issue, and it sprouts into this giant, unmanageable nightmare of a problem that winds up with them in jail for a good, long time, because the signs were ignored and they didn't get help managing it before then.

My nigger WOMEN also rape.Dominating is a factor but some people just love to fuck or have a strong desire and just cant get a mate to endulge in and boom rape occurs. If theyre fucking psycho of course!

Someone once told me

May be true or is he a pedophile?

You might want to be careful about referring to people you don't know on the internet that way. Just saying.

Women also rape, yes. Very, very rarely, but they do. When it happens, it's just as much about power issues as it is when a man does it.

 

[ParaChomp]

I know which part of the forums the topic at hand could heavily be applied to.