This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Paedophilia is natural

RabbitCFH

It's naturally sick. People aged 15-17 are not ready to have kids. The 'legal' age should not be lowered but increased to 18 like in most countries.

lol what?

Reply 21

joey11223

20

CherryCherryBoomBoom

Yes, you're so right, too many people misuse the word "pedophile" these days.

yeah, red tops like the SUN and Daily Mail are terrible for it, it's like they intentionally do not research what they have news articles on.

But It's so terrible, especially in America where the age of consent is 18 in many states. A 19-20 yr old guy with a 16 yr old girls gets called a paedophile, sex offender etc, if the girls parents are conservative or plain controlling and don't like her boyfriend, they push for a rape charge, guy may or may not get a jail term, all that for a 3-4 yr age gap, that's not paedophilia at all.

Reply 22

joey11223

20

cant reach the remote

lol what?

of course he's so right lol, cos you know everyone obeys that law and they count down the days until their both 16 before having sex. :rolleyes:

Reply 23

username266003

20

cant reach the remote

lol what?

I edited my post already. :p:

Reply 24

hunagdi

OP

10

MrCharmed

Paedophillia, despite gross miss use of the word, refers to the attraction of pre-pubescant children. As long as your being attracted to a 15 year old whom has gone through puberty it is not paedophillia. Moron.

Read my previous reply to concubine, the same applies to you.

Reply 25

Qoph

hunagdi

A womens body is physiologically speaking best suited to having a baby from around the age of 15-17 when the chances of delivering a safe, mentally sound baby are at an optimum. Surely from a darwinian point of view making sex illegal for women between these ages is preposterous, and for those of you who bring up flimsy arguments along the lines of "oh, but we have moved on from stone age times, we have developed a higher sense of morality based on reason" then does the arguments of gays claiming their sexual orientation is natural, and thus should be respected, seem weak. In short, men have a genetical predisposition towards paedophilia (social constructs seemed to have persuaded some that this is not the case) so should the legal age of having sex be drastically lower?

The argument of nature is in my opinion weak. More or less natural is also the pursuit of power or the killing for survival. We're living in a civilisaion, an artificial society and not in a natural community. I doing so there a rules of cohabition to follow, which are perhaps not natural but necessary.
Furtmermore you're misunderstood Darwinism. For Darwin, human superiority has meant overall a cultural advantage.

Reply 26

iain7

While I don't agree with paedophila at all, I'd like to point out, isn't the age of consent 14 in Germany? And like.. 13 in some cases in Japan? And it's something ridiculous like 9 in Mexico. It's just that in a more developed society such as in the UK or the USA, it would lower the quality of life if there were more young teenagers getting pregnant.

However OP, I do agree with your statement. From a darwinian point of view, the human body must mature incredibly quickly at a certain age for a reason. I don't think it's so disgusting to be attracted to 15-16 year olds because everyone has different tastes. People overuse the word paedophile - my girlfriend is in the year below, and even though she's the same age as many girls in my year, I'm frequently called a pedo (as a joke, of course).

Taking advantage of people by using their young age, however, is unforgiveable in my book. Having said that, people seem to talk about paedophiles, even ones that are attracted to fully matured girls, in the same way that witches were treated in the dark ages XD

Reply 27

hunagdi

OP

10

iain7

While I don't agree with paedophila at all, I'd like to point out, isn't the age of consent 14 in Germany? And like.. 13 in some cases in Japan? And it's something ridiculous like 9 in Mexico. It's just that in a more developed society such as in the UK or the USA, it would lower the quality of life if there were more young teenagers getting pregnant.

The age of consent in Spain is 13 (the lowest I could find, and was 12 before 1999). I believe that age is far too young.

Reply 28

Qoph

iain7

While I don't agree with paedophila at all, I'd like to point out, isn't the age of consent 14 in Germany? And like.. 13 in some cases in Japan? And it's something ridiculous like 9 in Mexico. It's just that in a more developed society such as in the UK or the USA, it would lower the quality of life if there were more young teenagers getting pregnant.

It really depends how old the partner is. As far as I know somebody younger than 14 is only allowed to have sexual intercourse with someone who is also younger than 14 (Some relationships could become theoretical a case for the judges after the birtday of one party)
Moreover somebody who is over 21 is not allowed to have sexual intercourse with someone who is also younger than 16 (inclusive).

Reply 29

iain7

Same. I think that the rules for consent should be:
a) sexually developed
b) mature enough to cope with relationships and sex, eg. possible pregnancy, using protection, able to control themselves, etc.

For this to be true, an absolute minimum of 14 is needed - even then, I think 15/16 as it is in the UK is better. Having said that, it really depends on the person and putting a blanket rule over the top, while necessary, isn't the best way of doing it - it's just that any other way is far too difficult. Do you remember that story about the 11 year old dad? Or the 10 and 11 year old rapists? What the hell is up with that? >.<

EDIT to prevent double posting:

Yeah, I didn't really check my facts, I just seem to remember reading something among those lines on wikipedia once or something.
I do agree with the rule involving age differences; while it's definitely wrong to say that age makes a difference in relationships, it'd be far too easy for people to take advantage otherwise.

DOUBLE EDIT:

I actually agree with a lot of Germany's laws over England's laws, and I think their country is run better than ours =P

Reply 30

Tsukuyomi

15

If you are around guys all the time, you might end up gay.
Same goes to people who are usually around kids

*cough* priests

Reply 31

Vodkaslur

hunagdi

A womens body is physiologically speaking best suited to having a baby from around the age of 15-17 when the chances of delivering a safe, mentally sound baby are at an optimum. Surely from a darwinian point of view making sex illegal for women between these ages is preposterous, and for those of you who bring up flimsy arguments along the lines of "oh, but we have moved on from stone age times, we have developed a higher sense of morality based on reason" then does the arguments of gays claiming their sexual orientation is natural, and thus should be respected, seem weak. In short, men have a genetical predisposition towards paedophilia (social constructs seemed to have persuaded some that this is not the case) so should the legal age of having sex be drastically lower?

This is such a poor argument and the fact you've even thought about this makes me feel sick and I'm sure people were also gay in the stone age ... :facepalm:

Reply 32

hunagdi

OP

10

Vodkaslur

This is such a poor argument and the fact you've even thought about this makes me feel sick and I'm sure people were also gay in the stone age ... :facepalm:

It would be helpful if you could elaborate on these 'flaws' rather than just stating my argument is flawed. Discussing, or thinking about these matters is not 'sick' because it is only through close examination of these issues can we hope to better understand society and the dynamic changes in the attitudes of the public.

Reply 33

v-zero

14

hunagdi

A womens body is physiologically speaking best suited to having a baby from around the age of 15-17 when the chances of delivering a safe, mentally sound baby are at an optimum. Surely from a darwinian point of view making sex illegal for women between these ages is preposterous, and for those of you who bring up flimsy arguments along the lines of "oh, but we have moved on from stone age times, we have developed a higher sense of morality based on reason" then does the arguments of gays claiming their sexual orientation is natural, and thus should be respected, seem weak. In short, men have a genetical predisposition towards paedophilia (social constructs seemed to have persuaded some that this is not the case) so should the legal age of having sex be drastically lower?

Finding a 15-17 year old attractive is not ever Paedophilia, which is the Latin for 'a love of children'. When you are fifteen, you are not a child.

Reply 34

lubus

12

u mixed up the terms there....

Reply 35

Jonny165

Im 16 Years old say if I was attracted to a girl in my school who was Age 14... Would that be wrong???? I don't find anything wrong with it. I say anyone who is age 18 or over who has some sort of sexual attraction for someone younger than 13 years old is a paedo

Reply 36

MrCharmed

hunagdi

The purpose of me starting the thread was to gather some fruitful views on the matter (which has happened, as I have discovered the difference between paedophilia and ephebophilia), but does that merit the label of moron? You are precisely the sort of patronizing **** that discourages discussion and openly attacks those whose intentionas are to better themselves by adding to their knowledge.

Well if your being sincere I apologise I had assumed you to be a troll, we got alot.

Reply 37

Jonny165

I was walking down the street and saw this little boy in his front garden completley naked he looked probably younger than 1 years old. Was his parent's paedos? Was I a paedo for noticing?

For a small child his penis looked quite odd. His willy was a bit bigger than his age lets keep it as that.

Paedophilia is natural

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you