Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why is homosexuality accepted, but not peadophilia? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chihiro94)
    its plausible to see why a slight change could result in change in attraction to the same sex but not to a child as it's never needed.
    I'm not being a lshglksfhg on purpose, I just want to clarify this last part: but surely an attraction to the same sex is never "needed", either?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BarackObama)
    Smashed it. Excellent point.

    I did actually mean to bring up homosexuality as a contrast to peadophilia (not comparison), though. As in, it can be viewed in the same way as peadophilia, yet we treat it differently.

    You're so right about the "cannot know what it is doing" part, though. Thank you.
    Just to point out I think it is the same for people who copulate with those with severe learning disabilities. In that case, yes the person is an adult, but cannot make a decision


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by michellehall)
    Just to point out I think it is the same for people who copulate with those with severe learning disabilities. In that case, yes the person is an adult, but cannot make a decision
    Excellent point yet again

    Off-topic, but just wondering: do you think the legal age is too low/too high in the UK? I mean, I know a lot of people who've lost their virginities at 16-17 and have come to severely regret it and, in the case of some, even develop mental health difficulties, yet I also know quite a few people who lost their virginities pre-legal age and are perfectly fine and happy about it.

    So yeah – legal age opinions? I'm kind of leaning towards 18 but at the same time, I just don't know.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BarackObama)
    Excellent point yet again

    Off-topic, but just wondering: do you think the legal age is too low/too high in the UK? I mean, I know a lot of people who've lost their virginities at 16-17 and have come to severely regret it and, in the case of some, even develop mental health difficulties, yet I also know quite a few people who lost their virginities pre-legal age and are perfectly fine and happy about it.

    So yeah – legal age opinions? I'm kind of leaning towards 18 but at the same time, I just don't know.
    Having been 16 at one point, I believe it is too low. However, people mature at completely different ages, and so I believe the key is not to change the age of consent but to provide sufficient education to allow people to make a fully informed decision. By this I don't mean the p goes in the v education, I mean emotional and relationship education. How that would happen I have no idea.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BarackObama)
    Of course. Imagine, however, a peadophile who is forced into celibacy because his sexual preferences are deemed inappropriate (i.e. he never has sex with anybody, so, in other words, no rape*). Is he still "mentally disturbed" for having such a sexual preference?

    What I mean is, nobody considers a heterosexual man "mentally disturbed" unless he was a rapist. However, some consider homosexual men to be mentally disturbed no matter whether they've raped someone or not. Most consider peadophilic men to be mentally disturbed no matter whether they've raped someone or not. What I'm asking is, do you think this is a fair approach?

    * = for now I'll assume that you all think that having sex with a consenting 12 year old counts as rape? (I agree, but I'm just clarifying)
    Yeh, but I still think what Jimmy Saville did was wrong.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Unfortunately you don't get to decide whether you think your homophobic or not. The equation in the opening post of homosexuality and paedophilia is frankly disgusting and you should feel thoroughly ashamed of yourself. The differences have been made plain to you throughout the thread and you still act as if you still have a point. Moreover, you're also peddling some sort of peculiar persecution complex as if your the one who feels under attacked for even asking the question.

    There is a reason why a topic such as this doesn't come up. What a disgrace.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theJdog)
    Yeh, but I still think what Jimmy Saville did was wrong.
    Yes, because he never really asked for consent. I'm asking about a genuine attraction to children (if such a thing exists).
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BarackObama)
    Well, let me summarise: homosexuality used to be classified as a mental illness (along the lines of schizophrenia, kleptomania, anorexia, etc) and a criminal offense. Peadophilia is still classed as a mental illness, I believe (if not, then definitely as a criminal offense).

    On that note: is peadophilia defined as an attraction to children or having sexual relations with children? I've Googled and it seems nobody can make up their mind, really.
    Ah, I see where you're going. You're saying that basically, like homosexuality, (and hetrosexuality, though unsure) paedophilia is in someone's genes, and it cannot be controlled, and so their whole life they would remain celibate. And also, you're saying that many people find paedophilia to be disgusting, but some years ago, homosexuality was also frowned upon, even though they are both gene controlled. Well, I think that someone who likes kids may have to remain celibate their whole life, unless they want to commit rape and be Jimmy Saville and ruin people's lives (because of the troment the victim faces after rape). And also, I believe that no, you cannot control your feelings, so you cannot possibly STOP someone from liking another. So if a person likes a 10 year old, say, then no one can really stop this feeling, regardless of whether it is sick or not. I don't really think that a person should be deemed as a paedophile if they like a child, but remain in control, and don't act upon it because they are aware of what the child may go through if he forces himself upon the child, and remains celibate his whole life. And I don't mean infatuation or a little crush. I mean like like - almost love. But sometimes, paedophilia is associated with LUST too, so the crave to have sex with a child. . . Wow, just writing this makes me shake. If it is LUST towards a child, then I think that should be deemed as paedophilia. And if they like the child but then have sex with him afterwards, without the child's consent, then yes, that should be called paedophilia. Unless, for some weird reason the child WANTS to have a relationship with this person, but that is highly unlikely. But then again, I can't really say much on this topic, as it is a very sensitive topic. I think it depends on a lot of things OP . . . It's very hard to say...

    Sorry if my answer didn't make sense or if people think it is nonsense. I did not intend on hurting your feelings or offending you, but if I have then I'm really sorry . . . This is a very interesting but sad topic I'm very sensitive on matters like this . . .
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by generaljonny)
    Unfortunately you don't get to decide whether you think your homophobic or not. The equation in the opening post of homosexuality and paedophilia is frankly disgusting and you should feel thoroughly ashamed of yourself. The differences have been made plain to you throughout the thread and you still act as if you still have a point. Moreover, you're also peddling some sort of peculiar persecution complex as if your the one who feels under attacked for even asking the question.

    There is a reason why a topic such as this doesn't come up. What a disgrace.
    A+ for a wonderful display of 0 mental ability.

    Let me simplify my original question for you even further:

    Homosexuality is seen as a "non-traditional" sexual preference.
    Paedophilia is also seen as a "non-traditional" sexual preference.

    Aside from the blatant differences I outlined in the sixth paragraph of my first post, what makes these sexual preferences so different that we (the West) accept one but not the other?

    Did you also conveniently not read the last sentence of my first post?

    P.S. Copied and pasted from Googling 'define: homophobia':

    ho·mo·pho·bi·a

    /hōməˈfōbēə/
    Noun

    An extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people.


    Where, exactly, have I shown this?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BarackObama)
    Yes, because he never really asked for consent. I'm asking about a genuine attraction to children (if such a thing exists).
    Oh right. Well I answered above.^^
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    The only thing which pisses me off is how the word paedophile is used for someone who has a relationship with a teenager these days.

    If a 30 yr old guy and a 14 year old girl get together, he'll be branded a sick paedophile, particularly by the red tops. I appreciate their target audience probably struggle to cope with such big words, but I really think they should use hebephile and ephebophile when the situation warrants.

    I mean right now if I had sex with a 15 yr old at 22 I'd be a sex offender, yet in Spain...no problems. The arbitrary nature of age of consent laws is problematic.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ham22)
    How many times do we have to have this thread?
    We'll run out of threads that haven't been replied to with "how many times do we have to have this thread?" pretty soon.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Children shouldn't be having sex with one another so certainly not with older people

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    It is an interesting point of view OP, but no.

    Homosexual acts between 2 people are carried with consent from both partners, unless it is rape, which is extremely rare for homosexuals. This is judged as acceptable, since heterosexuals do the exact same. It is only wrong if one person is forced.

    Paedophiles intend to have sexual acts with a child, who has no real sex drive of their own and therefore the child is forced or manipulated. The child cannot give consent, because they do not have the emotional or physical maturity to be in a sexual relationship. Therefore the act of sex with children is abuse.

    Homosexual is more natural and a preference while paedophilia tends to suggest an issue with the person. Hence counseling is given to ex-paedophiles.

    I cannot see paedophilia pride events happening, child have always been the protected innocent ones, and I cannot imagine parents supporting other adults to molest their child.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    As has been already established Paedophilia, like homosexuality is beyond the control of the person. I mean, who would want that stigma attached to them?! It is wrong on ethical grounds due to issues with consent.

    But where does that leave things like child pornography? I mean, sure real life stuff should be illegal, as the acts depicted obviously took place, which means that children were abused.
    But what about animated child pornography? The likes of lollicon, or even just a standard animated scene. It is my belief that if a Paedophile cannot get access to such content online, their sex drive is more likely to make them abduct a child and prey on youngsters. It's one of the reasons why I think Cameron's firewall is an incredibly dangerous idea.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BarackObama)
    Let me clarify: I am not homophobic to any degree (I'd be a hypocrite if I was – I like girls too, hello), but the idea popped into my mind and I know of no better people to discuss this with than, well, the kind of TSRers who lurk on the Debate & Current Affairs forum.

    So, let's just compare the two.

    Paedophilia:
    — viewed as 'unnatural' by some
    — viewed as 'gross' by some
    — is arguably just a natural preference

    Homosexuality:
    — viewed as 'unnatural' by some
    — viewed as 'gross' by some
    — is arguably just a natural preference

    So what's the difference? Do you think in 50 years' time we'll be seeing peadophilic pride matches, for instance?

    I do know and understand that a) most paedophilic relations tend to be forced (i.e. one of the people involved has given no consent or been bribed/blackmailed) and that b) legally, there is no maximum age difference requirement for brides and grooms (?), so obviously the two differ in those respects, but honestly, I haven't been able to get this out of my mind.

    Literally, the only arguments I've ever heard being used against paedophilia are "it's not right" and "it's disgusting" – so, basically, exactly the same as the arguments most commonly used against homosexuality.

    Can someone help me out here? What do you think?

    EDIT: Guys, come on. Why the thumbs-down? Is it not blatantly obvious that I'm playing devil's advocate?
    I've a hard time believing that to be honest when there is the massive issue surrounding paedophilia of lack of consent/being considered unable to consent.

    That's incidentally why I believe it'll never become accepted/legal. Yes both paedophilia & homosexuality are preferences, yes I would say that they are something which you are and cannot change, but homosexuality, attraction towards adults, involves only those who can consent to sex and understand the implications of that, paedophilia doesn't.

    I think what we might (or rather should) see, is a middle ground, whereby paedophilia is not allowed to be practised, but it is not seen in an irrational way as anything other than either a) a mental illness, or b) a sexual preference which in both cases the person can do nothing about (apart from restrain themselves from acting upon their urges).
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChocoCoatedLemons)
    What? The difference is obvious - one involves someone who does not understand the nature or consequences of a sex act, and therefore cannot legally consent to it, and the other is two consenting adults having sex. There's a massive difference.

    That's really the end of this thread.
    To play devil's advocate to some extent, you could well argue that the 'nature and consequences of a sex act' (beyond pregnancy, which we've largely managed to overcome through contraception) are completely social constructs.

    The emotional damage to children caused by sex at a young age isn't really about the act, it's about the status and expectations we hold of the act.

    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    Because children are not fully physically and mentally mature, so can't properly consent. (Though this is obviously slightly arbitrary to some extent, given that different countries have different ages of consent.)
    We are OK with children consenting to a lot of other things. What we feel they don't understand are what we imbue sexuality with. There's no inherent connection between these things and rubbing body parts together in a way that feels nice.

    That said, this is entirely theoretical. For better or worse, we do live in a society where these norms exist and children will generally be damaged emotionally by sex at a young age. That's not really the paedophile's fault though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Here's the thing... Homosexuality involves two CONSENTING individuals and is thus legal, as long as they are above the age of CONSENT. I know some homosexual people and they are no different to everyone else, most just want to have a normal consenting relationship, but with a member of the same sex.

    However, peadophilia is rightly viewed as illegal and disgusting because the prepubescent child in question is far too young to be able to LEGALLY give consent to the adult person who is attracted to the child.

    I know the author is playing "devils advocate" but its completely unreasonable to compare homosexuality and peadophilia on the same level because one is viewed by the majority of the population as a legal and OK thing, whereas the latter is not accepted because it is quite a heinous crime. For example, in the Netherlands the smoking of weed is accepted because it has evidently few harmful effects, but the snorting of cocaine is not accepted because it causes serious effects to the user's health and is thus widely viewed as dangerous.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by keromedic)
    Someone attracted to a 16 yr old would be an ephebophile and I think it'd be statuory rape as opposed to child molestation!
    Why would it be statutory rape is they are 16, i.e. over the age of consent? :confused:

    Anyway, I don't think the term statutory rape is used in the UK. Having sex with someone between the ages of 13 and 15 is illegal, but it's not considered rape. 12 and under it is though.

    To be honest, I don't think being attracted to a 16 year old necessarily makes you an anything phile. I think it's just normal hetero or homo sexuality. The problem is when someone has an obsession with young people and doesn't really have any interest in people of a more appropriate age. I don't think it makes sense to brand someone an ephebophile just because they have some attraction to the occasional teenager.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chloro)
    I know the author is playing "devils advocate" but its completely unreasonable to compare homosexuality and peadophilia on the same level because one is viewed by the majority of the population as a legal and OK thing, whereas the latter is not accepted because it is quite a heinous crime.
    I don't think it's unreasonable to point out the similarities they do have. The OP didn't deny they have big differences as well. No need to get offended by it
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.