People are too harsh on paedophiles

Scroll to see replies

No more than an animated or virtual depiction of any other crime will encourage people watching it to go out and commit it for real. For example, should we ban GTA on the basis that it will encourage people to go into organised crime?

No because most people who play GTA are not ****ed up in the head. Paedophiles are. If you give GTA to a psychopath that would most likely fuel their disorder and encourage them to commit attacks in real life.

Reply 101

I am Kira

Original post by Trapz99

Paedophilia is absolutely wrong and disgusting. You have got to be ****ed up in the head to have those sorts of thoughts about children and people with paedophiles thoughts should be treated and given counselling, not given animated child porn and accepted into society.

All societies are going to have paedophiles there's no way to change that
No society is perfect, the point of a society is to help those who fall out of society :naughty:

Reply 102

Trapz99

Original post by I am Kira

If simulated child porn would lead to less victims you still wouildnt legalise SIMULATED child porn :hmmmm2:

No I would not. It is ****ed up to believe that something of that nature should even exist.

Reply 103

I am Kira

Original post by Trapz99

Loooool mate you are clearly pulling all your "facts" out your ass

Reply 104

Trapz99

Original post by I am Kira

All societies are going to have paedophiles there's no way to change that
No society is perfect, the point of a society is to help those who fall out of society :naughty:

Yeah, by giving paedophiles some treatment or counselling to remove those disgusting thoughts from their ****ed up heads.

Reply 105

I am Kira

Original post by Trapz99

No I would not. It is ****ed up to believe that something of that nature should even exist.

Well obviously it does, if you're negelecting the beenfits you're just being ignorant

Reply 106

I am Kira

Original post by Trapz99

Yeah, by giving paedophiles some treatment or counselling to remove those disgusting thoughts from their ****ed up heads.

Lol do you not have any desires that you're not proud of?
Would you like being told you're fked up for something you do not control?

Reply 107

Trapz99

Original post by I am Kira

Loooool mate you are clearly pulling all your "facts" out your ass

No, you just hold a disgusting opinion which I wholeheartedly disagree with. Paedophiles is disgusting. Child porn of any sort is disgusting. Therefore, they should bight be illegal and not accepted in society. The solution to paedophilia is to impose strict penalties on paedophilia such as life in prison or the death penalty.

Reply 108

Trapz99

Original post by I am Kira

Lol do you not have any desires that you're not proud of?
Would you like being told you're fked up for something you do not control?

No I don't.

Reply 109

I am Kira

Original post by Trapz99

Lol mate people are still going to commit crimes no matter the punishment
So you find something disgusting so it hould be illegal
Some people find gays disgusting, should being gay be illegal too
You can't make having a thought or desire illegal

Reply 110

I am Kira

I still think paedophilia is wrong and I'm not saying we should legalise sex with minors in fact im encouraging the opposite of that
Thanks for your words :yep:

Reply 111

anosmianAcrimony

Original post by animeamanda1412

I read the main points, I'm too tired to read the whole thing, but just the "pedophiles don't have a choice" bit...
So if your child was a victim of pedophilia...would you actually tell them "I'm sorry, but it wasn't their choice"

Child molestation is a choice, but pedophilia, for the most part, isn't.

Reply 112

anosmianAcrimony

Original post by Trapz99

If paedophiles know that society will revile them whether or not they molest children, do you really think that will make them less likely to molest children?

Reply 113

I am Kira

Original post by anosmianAcrimony

Child molestation is a choice, but pedophilia, for the most part, isn't.

Very true

Reply 114

joey11223

Original post by Twinpeaks

You think the only difference between a paraphilia and sexuality is merely a label? I suggest you do some reading around the two. They are two very different things.

#

Honestly butting in here but what do you mean? Your fetishes/paraphilias are an aspect of your sexuality. If your reliance on your paraphilia is so strong that you are unable to engage in "vanilla" sexual encounters without it as a stimulus, then your entire sexuality revolves around it. It's classed as a sexual disorder if it's something you cannot be aroused without,

and as for paedophilia and whether it's to a degree an orientation..

"Pedophilia emerges before or during puberty, and is stable over time. It is self-discovered, not chosen. For these reasons, pedophilia has been described as a disorder of sexual preference, phenomenologically similar to a heterosexual or homosexual sexual orientation."

Anyway agree OP people need to feel they can help get to control their desires. Unsure about the argument on virtual pornography, whether it acts as a release or would encourage them to enact it.

but it de

Reply 115

sleepysnooze

Original post by Twinpeaks

This is my last post to you. You just aren't understanding this.I don't know why, your brain seems incapable of comprehending this, makes me wonder what your cognitive capacities are to be honest.

The decision to have sex with a person is not just biological, it involves a range of psychological factors. For example, whether you feel ready to have sex, whether you want to have sex with that person. Whether you know your own mind enough, to distinguish between wanting sex and knowing it's the best for yourself, or whether you are doing it due to peer pressure, not wanting to let someone down, or thinking it's what should be done. Whether you have the ability to be safe and responsible about it. All of these, are a function of cognitive processes, dare I say... duh.

look. I'm sorry but this is insane.
you ability
to consent
isn't dependent
on the consequences
of that consent
which can be made
when your body (and mind) is developed sufficiently
and you, situationally, desire sex with another person

your formula for consent seems to be:
"my desire for when their consenting age should be, *based on extremely flawed reasoning and consequentialism) + government action"

when really, the formula is:
the age when they enter puberty (regarding the mind and body) + an opinion of wanting to have sex with another person.

your formula = "consent / consequences"
my formula = "consent"

it's literally as simple as that - I don't care about good or bad consequences - the only thing I care about here is whether a person is capable, based on their body's development, of consenting. you care about totally irrelevant factors. you want a government-based prohibiton of sex until a certain age. I want an actual age of consent.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 116

username937957

I agree that paedophiles who do not act upon their thoughts shouldn't be as harshly punished or put in the same group as those who do act upon them. The tabloids and vigilante groups who regularly leak the sex offender registry are not helping either.

I don't agree that paedophilia is a sexual orientation or anything but a mental illness, and that we should work on trying to help offenders who haven't contacted children or sexually/physically assaulted them, rather than send them to prison for years and make them a pariah when they're released.

So I do see your point OP but I think it's too far to try and legitimise it as a sexual orientation or fetish the same way LGBT is.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 117

anosmianAcrimony

Original post by Bonoahx

I don't agree that paedophilia is a sexual orientation or anything but a mental illness, and that we should work on trying to help offenders who haven't contacted children or sexually/physically assaulted them, rather than send them to prison for years and make them a pariah when they're released.

If a person hasn't contacted children, in what way could they be considered an offender? And since when do we send people to prison for having a mental illness?

Reply 118

I am Kira

Original post by Bonoahx

Why don't u think it's a sexual orientation
Aren't paedophiles sexually attracted to kids and isn't a sexual attraction an orientation?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 119

username937957

Original post by anosmianAcrimony

If a person hasn't contacted children, in what way could they be considered an offender? And since when do we send people to prison for having a mental illness?

Watching child pornography is a crime that doesn't involve contacting children, for example, unless if you would include that as such.

I'm not saying that the police can read minds and go about arresting anyone who has ever thought anything about paedophillia, but the law isn't particularly sympathetic towards paedophiles regardless of the severity of their crime.

Original post by I am Kira

Why don't u think it's a sexual orientation
Aren't paedophiles sexually attracted to kids and isn't a sexual attraction an orientation?

Posted from TSR Mobile

I think calling it a sexual orientation is somewhat legitimising it, and saying that it is OK. Being sexually attracted to a child who generally doesn't understand what's going on and can easily be taken advantage of is not the same thing as liking members of the same sex, or both sexes. There is some evidence that CBT helps reduces recidivism in terms of watching child porn, grooming kids, etc, whilst evidence around things like gay conversion therapy says that it doesn't help at all and may lead to psychological problems.

Even if you scientifically speaking it is a sexual orientation it would pave the way to make paedophilia more socially acceptable as it was in the past with figures like Jimmy Saville. Would you consider bestiality a sexual orientation, and would you want it recognised as such?