This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
are we treating pedophile the same way we treated homosexuals a century ago?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by The_Internet
Ahhh I was wondering why this was closed, cos there was none of the usual trolly-nes that happens with these kinds of threads. Thans for re-opening 
Yeah when I submitted my last response from my phone, I must have ticked the 'close this thread' box by accident.
Anyway, back on topic.
I'm certainly sympathetic.
But then I also don't agree with people who think child molesters should be brutally raped and harmed while in prison. It gives me no joy, even though I recognise their actions are terrible.
But then I also don't agree with people who think child molesters should be brutally raped and harmed while in prison. It gives me no joy, even though I recognise their actions are terrible.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Reluire
It doesn't matter if they're only attracted to children or not. Any sexual attraction to children is a demonstration of paedophilia.
Original post by Reluire
No, you've just committed a strawman there because I never made that comment, nor did I infer it.
No, you've just committed a strawman there because I never made that comment, nor did I infer it.
Original post by Reluire
I said that we need to offer more support to those who need and want it. At the moment if you try to approach most people, even in the medical profession, about having such feelings, you'll often be turned away and spat at in disgust. Instead,
Original post by Reluire
we need councillors and suchlike who are prepared to support grown adults with finding coping strategies and ways of never acting on their desires. Imagine how isolating it must feel to be someone with paedophilic feelings? In many ways, this probably causes them to act out - because society doesn't care for them, therefore why not? It's almost like they have nothing to lose. Treat these people like humans and they'll probably act like them. Equally, treat them like animals and that's probably how they'll behave.
Original post by Odd socks
I have no sympathy for paedophiles, whether they 'act on it' or not, it's disgusting.
and I can't believe you're comparing healthy attraction to the same sex to an adult being sexually attracted to a child. they're in no way similar.
Posted from TSR Mobile
and I can't believe you're comparing healthy attraction to the same sex to an adult being sexually attracted to a child. they're in no way similar.
Posted from TSR Mobile
This, albeit homosex is also unhealthy, but god damn you progressives. You are attempting to NORMALISE paedophilia. This is goddamn absurd. Gawker Media and the New York Times also published sympathy articles in favour of normalising bestiality recently too. This sexual decadent behaviour is warping the next generation, especially if you equate homosex, beastsex and paedophilia to heterosex.
Ok, it's just a "preference", but it's a forbidden one for reasons. Those who claim to simply show a preference in such abhorrent desired are going to be cast from society and too sodding right: if they can't keep their thoughts in their head they are able to influence somebodies children. Would you allow your 12 year old daughter to date a 30 year old bloke? Come on, let's be real progressive for a moment and give the girl what she wants- it's consensual, right?
This is the part of leftist philosophy that just gets my goat completely. They try to claim moral high ground on every issue; human rights for all, raise the sickle! Pro choice is not the be all and end all of "rights", and you do not have the right to screw kids, animals or family members. Just_stop_trying_to_normalise_this_decadent_behaviour.
Original post by HigherMinion
This, albeit homosex is also unhealthy, but god damn you progressives. You are attempting to NORMALISE paedophilia. This is goddamn absurd. Gawker Media and the New York Times also published sympathy articles in favour of normalising bestiality recently too. This sexual decadent behaviour is warping the next generation, especially if you equate homosex, beastsex and paedophilia to heterosex.
Ok, it's just a "preference", but it's a forbidden one for reasons. Those who claim to simply show a preference in such abhorrent desired are going to be cast from society and too sodding right: if they can't keep their thoughts in their head they are able to influence somebodies children. Would you allow your 12 year old daughter to date a 30 year old bloke? Come on, let's be real progressive for a moment and give the girl what she wants- it's consensual, right?
This is the part of leftist philosophy that just gets my goat completely. They try to claim moral high ground on every issue; human rights for all, raise the sickle! Pro choice is not the be all and end all of "rights", and you do not have the right to screw kids, animals or family members. Just_stop_trying_to_normalise_this_decadent_behaviour.
Ok, it's just a "preference", but it's a forbidden one for reasons. Those who claim to simply show a preference in such abhorrent desired are going to be cast from society and too sodding right: if they can't keep their thoughts in their head they are able to influence somebodies children. Would you allow your 12 year old daughter to date a 30 year old bloke? Come on, let's be real progressive for a moment and give the girl what she wants- it's consensual, right?
This is the part of leftist philosophy that just gets my goat completely. They try to claim moral high ground on every issue; human rights for all, raise the sickle! Pro choice is not the be all and end all of "rights", and you do not have the right to screw kids, animals or family members. Just_stop_trying_to_normalise_this_decadent_behaviour.
You seemed to have missed the distinction between demonizing the attraction and the acting upon said attraction.
Original post by Odd socks
I have no sympathy for paedophiles, whether they 'act on it' or not, it's disgusting.
and I can't believe you're comparing healthy attraction to the same sex to an adult being sexually attracted to a child. they're in no way similar.
Posted from TSR Mobile
and I can't believe you're comparing healthy attraction to the same sex to an adult being sexually attracted to a child. they're in no way similar.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Both involve being persecuted for sexual desires. They may differ in their effects on other parties, but there's no difference to the person experiencing those desires.
This debate is usually steered too much by visceral reactions like the one you express here.
Original post by n00
It matters if you're saying paedophilia is just like homosexuality or heterosexuality.
No, not a straw man, i never said you had, i asked you a question.
Really? So psychiatrists spit at and turn away patients that confide in them about being attracted to children? I'm not convinced that can be a huge problem, i'm sure the vast majority will do what they can to help and support them or where they fear for the safety of others, inform the relevant authorities, just like with any other patient.
I'm sure everyone's had desires for something or someone they can't have at some point, so it does seem to me that you're saying paedophiles need more help to stop them from committing rape than non paedophiles.
No, not a straw man, i never said you had, i asked you a question.
Really? So psychiatrists spit at and turn away patients that confide in them about being attracted to children? I'm not convinced that can be a huge problem, i'm sure the vast majority will do what they can to help and support them or where they fear for the safety of others, inform the relevant authorities, just like with any other patient.
I'm sure everyone's had desires for something or someone they can't have at some point, so it does seem to me that you're saying paedophiles need more help to stop them from committing rape than non paedophiles.
That's another strawman because I'm not equating them. All I'm equating is their similarity in being characteristics hard-wired into the human psyche. One does not choose to have heterosexual feelings just as one does not choose to have feelings for children. That isn't a justification of paedophilia, that's just a brute fact.
Yes. Psychiatrists and councillors are still very edgy about dealing with adults claiming to have sexual feelings for children. It's understandable in some ways. But I disagree with you because I don't think there's currently an adequate level of support for adults who need help to make sure that they never act on their desires.
Children are perhaps the most vulnerable people in society, so maybe paedophiles do need more help than others. Rape is too broad a term to use as a point of comparison here and it's not something that we can prevent in the same way we can help adults with paedophilic tendencies to live a life in which they'll never sexually assault or abuse a child.
Original post by HigherMinion
This, albeit homosex is also unhealthy, but god damn you progressives. You are attempting to NORMALISE paedophilia. This is goddamn absurd. Gawker Media and the New York Times also published sympathy articles in favour of normalising bestiality recently too. This sexual decadent behaviour is warping the next generation, especially if you equate homosex, beastsex and paedophilia to heterosex.
Ok, it's just a "preference", but it's a forbidden one for reasons. Those who claim to simply show a preference in such abhorrent desired are going to be cast from society and too sodding right: if they can't keep their thoughts in their head they are able to influence somebodies children. Would you allow your 12 year old daughter to date a 30 year old bloke? Come on, let's be real progressive for a moment and give the girl what she wants- it's consensual, right?
This is the part of leftist philosophy that just gets my goat completely. They try to claim moral high ground on every issue; human rights for all, raise the sickle! Pro choice is not the be all and end all of "rights", and you do not have the right to screw kids, animals or family members. Just_stop_trying_to_normalise_this_decadent_behaviour.
Ok, it's just a "preference", but it's a forbidden one for reasons. Those who claim to simply show a preference in such abhorrent desired are going to be cast from society and too sodding right: if they can't keep their thoughts in their head they are able to influence somebodies children. Would you allow your 12 year old daughter to date a 30 year old bloke? Come on, let's be real progressive for a moment and give the girl what she wants- it's consensual, right?
This is the part of leftist philosophy that just gets my goat completely. They try to claim moral high ground on every issue; human rights for all, raise the sickle! Pro choice is not the be all and end all of "rights", and you do not have the right to screw kids, animals or family members. Just_stop_trying_to_normalise_this_decadent_behaviour.
I think if you'd read many of the defence responses in this thread you'd realise that no-one is trying to normalise or justify child molestation. The point is that there's a distinction to be drawn between a paedophile who actively molests children and a paedophile who has never in their life made sexual contact with a child and never wants to if they can help it.
Surely if you want to protect children, then what people like myself are suggesting is the best course of action. We shouldn't shun anyone who just wants to find help and guidance - we should offer all the help we can to make sure they never make sexual contact with a child. As I mentioned in one of my other posts, I think there's a huge element of isolation to be considered. This culture of spitting on anyone who admits sexual feelings towards children is only augmenting the child abuse culture because these people feel they have no source of help and society is against them. It becomes a case of having nothing to lose. If we actually tried to help these people, I think the rates of child sex abuse would plummet. And isn't that what we all want regardless of whether we're left-wing or right-wing?
Original post by HigherMinion
This, albeit homosex is also unhealthy, but god damn you progressives. You are attempting to NORMALISE paedophilia. This is goddamn absurd.
I don't think anyone has said that. I think the popular view in the thread is that paedophilia (and by that I mean paedophilia per se, not child abuse) should be dealt with as an illness rather than a crime.
Original post by TurboCretin
I don't think anyone has said that. I think the popular view in the thread is that paedophilia (and by that I mean paedophilia per se, not child abuse) should be dealt with as an illness rather than a crime.
I'm sorry, but all I have seen are people claiming that it is a state of mind that cannot be changed, as is the same defence with homosexuality. I don't really believe in all of these sexual attraction "types": until someone acts on their feels, they are neutral/hetero. If you tell someone you're into children, baby goats or yer mum, that does not make you a paedophile, zoophile or incestuous. Acting on them makes you that. It's like "sapiosexual", what the hell is that? Attraction to intelligence? Why must you try to make yourselves sound special with buzzword names and unique sexualities?
You are trying to normalise it. At some point in the future, you will change the argument and claim that 13 year olds should vote and if they can vote they are clearly able to consent. Or maybe, that lying, cheating and swindling can occur between adults, so why not adult+child? It's the stuff of lunacy and this slippery slope is getting steep, in the downward direction.
Is it an illness if you think it? I don't think so. Acting on it most certainly is. Hell, if you decided it was a mental illness then a large percentage of Japanese men watching Loli and Shota would be mentally ill and in need of evangelical correction by your measures. How progressive.
Original post by Reluire
That's another strawman because I'm not equating them. All I'm equating is their similarity in being characteristics hard-wired into the human psyche. One does not choose to have heterosexual feelings just as one does not choose to have feelings for children. That isn't a justification of paedophilia, that's just a brute fact.
Original post by Reluire
Yes. Psychiatrists and councillors are still very edgy about dealing with adults claiming to have sexual feelings for children. It's understandable in some ways. But I disagree with you because I don't think there's currently an adequate level of support for adults who need help to make sure that they never act on their desires.
Original post by Reluire
Children are perhaps the most vulnerable people in society, so maybe paedophiles do need more help than others.
Original post by Reluire
Rape is too broad a term to use as a point of comparison here and it's not something that we can prevent in the same way we can help adults with paedophilic tendencies to live a life in which they'll never sexually assault or abuse a child.
So we can't prevent adult rape but we can prevent child rape?(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by HigherMinion
I'm sorry, but all I have seen are people claiming that it is a state of mind that cannot be changed, as is the same defence with homosexuality. I don't really believe in all of these sexual attraction "types": until someone acts on their feels, they are neutral/hetero. If you tell someone you're into children, baby goats or yer mum, that does not make you a paedophile, zoophile or incestuous. Acting on them makes you that. It's like "sapiosexual", what the hell is that? Attraction to intelligence? Why must you try to make yourselves sound special with buzzword names and unique sexualities?
Whether you 'believe' in them or not is irrelevant, they still exist. You also seem to lack a basic understanding of attraction. Attraction is a mental and physiological response, it doesn't need to be acted upon to be present. As for using unique words for different sexualities, how else do you propose we differentiate between them?
You are trying to normalise it. At some point in the future, you will change the argument and claim that 13 year olds should vote and if they can vote they are clearly able to consent. Or maybe, that lying, cheating and swindling can occur between adults, so why not adult+child? It's the stuff of lunacy and this slippery slope is getting steep, in the downward direction.
No one in this thread has said they want to normalise paedophilia, and to suggest otherwise betrays a lack of basic reading and comprehension skills on your part. The 'slippery slope' argument is just pure conjecture.
Is it an illness if you think it? I don't think so. Acting on it most certainly is. Hell, if you decided it was a mental illness then a large percentage of Japanese men watching Loli and Shota would be mentally ill and in need of evangelical correction by your measures. How progressive.
Paedophilia is recognised by medical professionals as a psychiatric disorder so yes, it can be considered a mental illness. Someone's actions or behaviour can be symptomatic of an illness but do not constitute the illness itself, that wouldn't even make any sense.
If those Japanese men have a desire to have sex with prepubescent children then yes, they have a mental disorder. I don't know what you mean by 'evangelical correction' though, I don't think anyone in their right mind would suggest that as a suitable response to a diagnosed mental illness.
Original post by n00
Well, no, it's not another straw man, unless the other one you refer to is the one you committed in claiming it was a straw man?
We talking about adults acting on any desires or just paedophiles?
Right, so it was a valid question and not a straw man. glad we've cleared that one up. I'm really not seeing the problem here. Paedophiles that don't show any inclination to act on their desires are clearly not a problem and don't need any more help than anyone else, but paedophiles that do, pose a risk to others and should be reported to the relevant authorities as currently happens.
So we can't prevent adult rape but we can prevent child rape?
We talking about adults acting on any desires or just paedophiles?
Right, so it was a valid question and not a straw man. glad we've cleared that one up. I'm really not seeing the problem here. Paedophiles that don't show any inclination to act on their desires are clearly not a problem and don't need any more help than anyone else, but paedophiles that do, pose a risk to others and should be reported to the relevant authorities as currently happens.
So we can't prevent adult rape but we can prevent child rape?It was a strawman because you assumed something from me that I never said nor inferred.
I don't know what else you're thinking of exactly. If we're talking about rape, I don't think there are many people who have to constantly fight the desire to rape because it's generally meant to be a very impulsive thing.
That's not what I was claiming strawman on. But anyway, you're right to some degree. But for some, attraction to children is like attraction to grown men or women to us. So lifelong celibacy isn't the most satisfying prospect. That's why the risk is elevated with paedophiles.
Adult raps is a very broad and often impulsive thing, whereas child rape doesn't tend to be so much. With adults it can become complicated by the role of intoxicants like drugs and alcohol for example. With children, it's nearly always the result of a grown adult exploiting a vulnerable child because they can. The issue of consent isn't blurry because it can never be given by anyone under the age of 16.
Original post by the north
im talking about how we preceive as disgusting creatures even though many would tell they dont choose to be attracted to children.
They can be attracted to them. But have some goddam self control and don't act on it if you're know it's a despicable act which causes so much pain and long term suffering.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by keromedic
I'm certainly sympathetic.
But then I also don't agree with people who think child molesters should be brutally raped and harmed while in prison. It gives me no joy, even though I recognise their actions are terrible.
But then I also don't agree with people who think child molesters should be brutally raped and harmed while in prison. It gives me no joy, even though I recognise their actions are terrible.
PRSOM. I used to be all like paedophiles should get a really harsh punishment, then I became less religious and a hell of a lot more liberal and now I think well they're still going to do x crime unless we try and stop it from happening in the first place. We could learn a lot from Norway
Original post by HigherMinion
I'm sorry, but all I have seen are people claiming that it is a state of mind that cannot be changed, as is the same defence with homosexuality. I don't really believe in all of these sexual attraction "types": until someone acts on their feels, they are neutral/hetero. If you tell someone you're into children, baby goats or yer mum, that does not make you a paedophile, zoophile or incestuous. Acting on them makes you that. It's like "sapiosexual", what the hell is that? Attraction to intelligence? Why must you try to make yourselves sound special with buzzword names and unique sexualities?
So basically attraction is only existent to the extent that we on it? That doesn't make sense. Then there is no attraction there is only actions. Also your assumption of an attraction label prior to sexual actions becomes incoherent. Not to mention the ludicrous idea of assuming heterosexuality despite a lack of heterosexual feelings.
You are trying to normalise it. At some point in the future, you will change the argument and claim that 13 year olds should vote and if they can vote they are clearly able to consent. Or maybe, that lying, cheating and swindling can occur between adults, so why not adult+child? It's the stuff of lunacy and this slippery slope is getting steep, in the downward direction.
Point to where it has been 'normalized' or even attempted to be so on the thread. And don't make claims about what any of us will do in the future as if you have some foresight. The slippery-slope argument is old and tired and is still fallacious reasoning.
Is it an illness if you think it? I don't think so. Acting on it most certainly is. Hell, if you decided it was a mental illness then a large percentage of Japanese men watching Loli and Shota would be mentally ill and in need of evangelical correction by your measures. How progressive.
How can acting on something be an 'illness'? If you are acting you are being intentional...that intention had to come from somewhere. Hint: that's your mentality and thoughts. The act wasn't the illness the thoughts were.
Original post by the north
im talking about how we preceive as disgusting creatures even though many would tell they dont choose to be attracted to children.
I totally agree, there should be a distinction made between TRUE Peadophila and currently Ephebophilia which is just lumped in together.
Basically a distinction should be made between those who like pre-pubscent children and those who are attracted to legally defined children who has entered into adolescence. Basically, I think if a girl has had her first blood, she's good to go. Ditto if the boy's testicles drop and voice breaks.
People who want to have sex with teenagers should be freely allowed to do so should the teenager give consent in a clear state of mind (obviously don't ply them with drink and whatnot). Not saying all teachers should have sex with their pupils, they should still be fired for unprofessionalism but not criminalised.
(edited 9 years ago)
I don't think it's uncommon for peadophiles to have been sexually abused as a child themselves. It becomes so normal to them them at such a young age that they start to enjoy it, then it becomes a part of them. I don't condone peadophilia, but it is incredibly sad for both parties involved.
Original post by n00
Paedophiles that don't show any inclination to act on their desires are clearly not a problem and don't need any more help than anyone else, but paedophiles that do, pose a risk to others and should be reported to the relevant authorities as currently happens.
Paedophiles that don't show any inclination to act on their desires are clearly not a problem and don't need any more help than anyone else, but paedophiles that do, pose a risk to others and should be reported to the relevant authorities as currently happens.
As for the idea that we already have appropriate safeguards. Many are uncomfortable dealing with such people. Psychologists are free to turn away patients and many don't want to work with pedophiles. There are surprisingly few resources available to them as a group, especially if they haven't been convicted of anything.
So we can't prevent adult rape but we can prevent child rape?It's not so much we can't prevent but we are more readily able to prevent one in that we have an, relatively specific, identifiable group who are at a higher risk for one than the other.
Original post by HigherMinion
I'm sorry, but all I have seen are people claiming that it is a state of mind that cannot be changed, as is the same defence with homosexuality. I don't really believe in all of these sexual attraction "types": until someone acts on their feels, they are neutral/hetero. If you tell someone you're into children, baby goats or yer mum, that does not make you a paedophile, zoophile or incestuous. Acting on them makes you that. It's like "sapiosexual", what the hell is that? Attraction to intelligence? Why must you try to make yourselves sound special with buzzword names and unique sexualities?
It's a good thing that facts don't revolve around what you or I think is the case. Paraphilia involve particular sexual interests, not necessarily behaviours.
The DSM-V classifies sexual interest in children as pedophilia, and acting on those desires as pedophilia disorder.
Original post by HigherMinion
You are trying to normalise it. At some point in the future, you will change the argument and claim that 13 year olds should vote and if they can vote they are clearly able to consent. Or maybe, that lying, cheating and swindling can occur between adults, so why not adult+child? It's the stuff of lunacy and this slippery slope is getting steep, in the downward direction.
No, I'm not. I'm simply saying that it's more productive to acknowledge that these people need help than to simply demonise them.
Original post by HigherMinion
Is it an illness if you think it? I don't think so. Acting on it most certainly is. Hell, if you decided it was a mental illness then a large percentage of Japanese men watching Loli and Shota would be mentally ill and in need of evangelical correction by your measures. How progressive.
I didn't say that it is an illness. Until a pedophile acts on his/her desires then it is neither an illness (according to the DSM) or a crime. I said that it should be treated more like an illness than a crime. The current stigma around the issue drives people to hide these desires and try to deal with them privately, with varying degrees of success.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
