Pedophilia. Is it a problem, and is there a solution?

Alright. If you haven't heard on the news, children in Florida have been molested and/or have been killed by sex offenders. It's been rough for kids, and their parents, and there is renewed interest for the lawmakers to decide what to do with pedophiles. The legislatures in Florida are deciding whether to lengthen the prison terms for sex offenders, or deciding to go to a more costlier "solution" as to "tag" each sex offender to keep a watch on them for life.

However, there's also study that suggests pedophilia is a disease or problem, similar to that of alcoholism, and it can be treated so that these "urges" could be more controlled on. Either way, this pedophilia is probably becoming a bigger problem, where no child can be safe.

What do you believe about pedophilia? Do you think it's a big problem? Do you think it can be treated like it's a disease? Is there a solution to the bigger problem?

ofcourse its a problem and no there isnt a solution. Its not a disease, more like a mental illness...its not related to anyother disease (as you said alcoholism...). Most people think homosexual men r the ones doing it when in actuality 85% of child molestors turn out to be straight men.

Its always been a problem since forever, and I dont think we can fix it. Its like raping and killing.. no fixing it, just punishment by the law.

If paedophilia is a disease, then someone better had find a cure, because the people who are paedos are, to put it frank, sick ****ks.

A paedophile is the worst type of person, in my books. It ruins a child's life, their family's life, and it's just plain disgusting.

Especially that story recently about Jessica Lunsford who was abducted in her home late at night. It just happened to turn out that the location where she lived was in a area of about 80 sex offenders/child molestors. I think the best action is to prevent this from happening is to inform the public of where these predators live. Also on the parents behalf they have to make sure that every lock in the house is locked, that their childeren are being supervised, that they do not live in a area with alot of sex offenders/child molestors, etc. Maybe even hire a bodyguard if your rich, just like that one movie "Man On Fire" which was good movie by the way...

Quote:

---

Its always been a problem since forever, and I dont think we can fix it. Its like raping and killing.. no fixing it, just punishment by the law.

---

There is a big difference between a pedophile and a child molestor, if every guy out there watching lolicon anime was molesting children, and if every guy watching tentacle hentai was raping women there would be a hell of a lot more crime than there actually is. The main thing is whether or not the person acts on whatever their bizzare fantasy might be. All acts that come out of people acting on these fantasies are definately a problem. I do believe that fantasies can be treated in a sense that they can be let go, what is unfortunate is that I think it requires the person to actually WANT to be free of that fantasy and those who are acting on it most likely do not care to rid themselves of it.

In essence, I think that even if we could free pedophiles and sex offenders of their taboo fantasies, it probably will not bring down the actual crime rate of rape or child molestation because those who would actually act on the impulses will generally not be the ones seeking treatment. Getting the fantasies our of pedophiles who would not actually molest a child is great but unfortunately will probably not stop child molestation.

edit:: However, one definate advantage of the possibility of ridding pedophilia related fantasies would be that the incentive for those criminally producing child pornography would decline as there would be less people trying to get their hands on it.

Oh, I know! Lets brainwash them and load them up with pills!

I bet you a fiver if anything happens its something close to that.

I'm the resident psych major here, I'll field this. To define pedophelia as a "mental disease" is a slippery slope, and not entirely accurate. To be honest, what makes people desire children is as much a mystery as homosexuality. True, some cases are the result of molestation or abuse, but most are absolutely impossible to predict.

What I CAN tell you, is there is no cure, probably will NEVER be a cure... I pity "pedophiles" in that they can't help their desires. It's the child molesters, the ones who actualize that desire, that I can (and will, and do) hate.

Ultimately, nothing can change a pedophile... just like homo or hetero sexualities, it's a more or less permamently locked system. The only effective way to stop pedophiles from desiring what they do is the same way as any other sexual alignment: kill the sex drive entirely.

The problem with that is obvious, when you realise that most child molesters don't UNDERSTAND what's wrong with what they do. Their feelings are as "natural" to them as mine are to me. They think it's *right* somehow. If someone started telling all homosexuals that they were to wear ankle bracelets and use hormone-surpression therapies...

Oh, and if you want to know what the numbers on pedophiles are:

25-30% (otherwise) Heterosexual males.
10-15% (otherwise) Gay or Bisexual males- this catagory is primarily the victems of molestation themselves.
35% Pedophile males, who have no sexual interests outside of children.
20-30% Women... unfortunately, female pedophelia is GROSSLY under-studied. This is the best guess with current knowlege, and we really have no idea. The number could well go up to 50% without surprising me at all. Women aren't suspect as much, they get reported less, the reports are believed less often, and DNA evidences are harder to acquire.

It should be noted that a great many pedophiles actually *SURPRESS THEMSELVES* and never act upon their desires. Just as a normal person can choose celibacy, so can a pedophile. Which could easily alter the statistics... we really don't know how many people out there actually desire, but never pursue, this behavior.

EDIT: To answer original post. YES, it's a problem. NO, it cannot be cured (without destroying sex drive entirely- which I'm cool with- I say "snip, snip, good bye testicles and/or clitoris"). And as far as I'm concerned, the most effective solution involves a big pen, a .22 caliber rifle, me, and unlimitted ammo.

I woudln't call it a disease. Cancer is a disease. Manic depression is a mental illness. Pedophilism is just a predisposition that someone has, an unfortunately malignant one, much like alcoholism, or being a psychopath. It's different in a way I'm struggling to explain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necronopticous

There is a big difference between a pedophile and a child molestor, if every guy out there watching lolicon anime was molesting children, and if every guy watching tentacle hentai was raping women there would be a hell of a lot more crime than there actually is. The main thing is whether or not the person acts on whatever their bizzare fantasy might be.

---

Not nearly enough people get this.

Has anyone here ever read "Lolita" by Vlad Nabokov? It's an interesting take on this whole discussion.

Take care all.

I don't see much difference in paedophiles and homosexuals, to be frank.

"And as far as I'm concerned, the most effective solution involves a big pen, a .22 caliber rifle, me, and unlimitted ammo."

A .22 has low power. And what's the big pen for? Either way, I concur.

I also don't believe that alcoholism is a "disease", just like drug addiction, but that's a different subject entirely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

A .22 has low power. And what's the big pen for? Either way, I concur.

---

The pen is so they can run and try to dodge, the .22 is because I like them (and they will break through human skulls, so they're good enough). The idea is simple: one should a little time for each target. Instead of just mowing them down with a chain gun.

Although, when selling the footage on pay-per-view, it might be best to use the chain gun :shoot: .

In all seriousness, pedophelia really is as much a mystery as homosexuality. But, before you start thinking this is an anti-gay thing, we really don't know what causes people to be hetero or bisexual, either. I'm bisexual, I try not to gay-bash. Even when the truth sounds like it.

Everything I've ever read about pedophilia catalouges it under psychological paraphilias, which envelop most sexual deviations and fetishes. I've never read about homosexuality or bisexuality being listed as a paraphilia, however I have a very tenuous grasp on the little I know about psychology. I just don't see how, scientifically speaking, the two of them are nearly similar, other than the fact that no one is entirely sure why this happens.

In the end, real psychological help is out there for people who need it. I think some people just don't want to lose their sex drive, and really who would?

However, I do feel sex offenders, while they do have rights if they have paid their debt to society, should be monitored much more closely than they are currently. I also think Megan's Law should have far stricter rules on forcing state and local governments to notify residents of a sex offender moving into the area.

Saquatch

Quote:

---

I don't see much difference in paedophiles and homosexuals, to be frank.

---

make me wanna punch you why doncha...

how can u not see a different.. pedophiliacs are feeding off the powerlessness of a child, while homosexual men/women feed off of the love of their partnets. Pedophelia borders on rape... homosexuality is a consentual thing, and is usually about love, rarely domination.. HUGE difference between an adult and a kid, and an adult with another adult... baka....

Quote:

---

I don't see much difference in paedophiles and homosexuals, to be frank.

---

You may disagree with someone, but your choice of expression is basically a flame. --foa

As weird as this is, I feel the need to stand up for our Missing Link friend... pedophelia IS a lot like homosexuality. Has no one read my posts? I know that homo/bi sexuality isn't qualified as a "disorder"... well, not any more (political correctness and such B.S.) but all basic sexual identities are similarly difficult to predict.

Oh, and again, I'm not gay bashing. I happen to like my bisexual-ness. But, the problem, many pedophiles happen to like THEIR orientation, too... although, you get some who resist (but, I know a lot of gay/lesbian people who struggled with accepting what they were). The only difference: in the case of pedophiles, I hope they continue fighting forever, or eat a bullet before they succumb, or ANYTHING but actualizing their desires.

I do not think pedophilia can be cured.

I think it's like being gay--you're just born that way, and that's all there is to it. In rare cases, perhaps it starts out as a fetish or something but A) grows stronger or B) grows stronger due to being a victim yourself. (I don't know much about this, I'm feeding off of some of what's already been said.)

I believe pedophiles should be closely monitored. Their residences should be made available to the public. Those living on the same street should be informed personally of the pedophile's presence by police, with a picture and a list of his previous crimes.

I see no point in increasing prison sentences. From what I understand, pedophiles tend to be the ones other inmates like to beat up/kill. If they manage to escape with their life, stepped-up monitoring and caution should suffice.

In another way of looking at this, i feel that pedophilla is nothing different than hetrosexuals, homosexuals or anything, it just is. You obvoiusly do not wake up in the morning and say i like *insert whatever here* sexually today and yup thats what i am going to like. I know its sorta overdone this example, but it holds true, you cant really force yourself to be like this.

I have nothing against pedophilla as long as the person does not harm anyone in liking their fetish or whatever. I do not view it as a disease, i rarely do view things that way, just because it is different and somewhat taboo to us does not mean that we are to say EVIL and start hating on it, its better to just look at it plainly without bias and see what it is. Its just a fetish of some sort, suppressed because many people in this society comdemn it, making it even more forbidden and tempting. I pity them, not because they have that feeling, but because society shuns them and they usually end up hurting the child (now if the child is not hurt [in every way possible] i couldnt care less, thats just me, think of what you will).

So in short, i dont see what pedophilla itself is a big deal, i do see why people are concerned because many children do get harmed by them, but about pedophilla itself only, i see no problem with it.

I think part of what gets people so fired up is that children generally don't know about pedophilia. A teenage girl (or boy) probably knows what rape is, and would offer resistance if assaulted. However, a child not only is too weak to do much, but may not even know the situation is wrong. He (or she) would not be alert to warning signs, and wouldn't know how to interpret them if he/she did notice. It's the vulnerability of someone dear that scares adults, I think. Not that I blame them for wanting to protect their children.

Lionx, you have an interesting point. Others have touched lightly upon it, but I think you were the first to flat say it. I'll have to spend some time thinking about that idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

As weird as this is, I feel the need to stand up for our Missing Link friend... pedophelia IS a lot like homosexuality. Has no one read my posts? I know that homo/bi sexuality isn't qualified as a "disorder"... well, not any more (political correctness and such B.S.) but all basic sexual identities are similarly difficult to predict.

Oh, and again, I'm not gay bashing. I happen to like my bisexual-ness. But, the problem, many pedophiles happen to like THEIR orientation, too... although, you get some who resist (but, I know a lot of gay/lesbian people who struggled with accepting what they were). The only difference: in the case of pedophiles, I hope they continue fighting forever, or eat a bullet before they succumb, or ANYTHING but actualizing their desires.

---

Alright!

I wasn't meaning to "gay-bash" in any way either, I ws just drawing that conclusion based on what already has been said in this thread. People think homosexuality is perfectly natural, and homosexuals are just fine and shouldn't be changed, but paedophilia is wrong and evil and disgusting? What's the difference? (By the way, I thought you meant big pen, like a big ink pen. Whoops.)

Alice, I wasn't relating homosexual sex with child molestation. In that case, I disagree with both, but that the child molester should be dealt with in a rather violent and painful way. The way I see it, the rapes, the beatings, everything they deal with in prison, they deserve it. But I was only talking about the difference--or lack thereof--between paedophilia and homosexuality.

-"Their feelings are as "natural" to them as mine are to me."
-"Pedophilism is just a predisposition that someone has"
-"In all seriousness, pedophelia really is as much a mystery as homosexuality."
-"I do not think pedophilia can be cured. I think it's like being gay--you're just born that way, and that's all there is to it."

Sounds like paedophilia and homosexuality are quite similar.

Quote:

---

-"Their feelings are as "natural" to them as mine are to me."
-"Pedophilism is just a predisposition that someone has"
-"In all seriousness, pedophelia really is as much a mystery as homosexuality."
-"I do not think pedophilia can be cured. I think it's like being gay--you're just born that way, and that's all there is to it."

Sounds like paedophilia and homosexuality are quite similar.

---

Sounds pretty similar to heterosexuality if you ask me.

Unfortunately I dont think theres anything that can be done besides expect them to supress there urges and come down on them like a tone of bricks if they even consider otherwise. If Hypnosis can cure smoking in up to one session then I wonder if the same could be done to clear someone of there urges. Yes I consider Hypnosis to be a reliable and very succesful form of mental therapy

Actually, hypnosis is effective, but it doesn't work on sexuality. You cannot actually use hypnosis to cure smoking, unless the smoker wants to quit. And they've tried hypnosis to curb homosexuality... usually gays who hate the fact that they're gay. It doesn't work on them, so it's unlikely to work on pedophiles, and I wouldn't want to run that experiment. Pavlovian adversion therapies fail, too. NOTHING we have EVER tried to do works, besides crushing the sex drive entirely with drugs or surgery. Or killing the child molesters, that works, too.

And I don't have a problem with homosexuality. But I have a problem with homosexual rapists. There is no way to have sex with a child without committing rape. That's my foundation for hating child molesters.

I dislike rape period. Why does it matter what the sexual orintation of who's commiting it is?

Pedophila, from a Psychology point of view, is similar to homosexuality. From a real life, social point of view, biologial and physiological point of view, hardly. Homosexuality is between consenting adults. Pedophilia is beyond the control of a child, so as earlier stated, it's always going to be 'rape'. Therefore, as for them both being a Psychologial mistery: yes, but as for being the same on other levels: no.

Of course, what I think of as pedophilia is not what the bulk of American societydoes. For example, I don't consider sex with someone who's 15 pedophilia...and I know with that comment a bunch of people will say "OMG EW!" but think about it: the body is ready to reproduce at 15 (maybe not completey, but just about), and in the past, and still in some societies, that's when they'd have people set up for marriage and to have children. Of course, I'd never go after anything younger than 17, because to me, that's icky. Is it nasty and wrong? That's up to you. But pedophilia? Hardly...in my book anyway.

As for pedophilia in general, I think it's icky, but I can't agree with and stress ENOUGH Necronopticus' post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necronopticus

There is a big difference between a pedophile and a child molestor, if every guy out there watching lolicon anime was molesting children, and if every guy watching tentacle hentai was raping women there would be a hell of a lot more crime than there actually is. The main thing is whether or not the person acts on whatever their bizzare fantasy might be.

---

if you want to go saying pedophelia is like homosexuality you have to say its like heterosexuality... thats just how its going to go buddies. Same with ANY other sexual "orientation' if you going to say that. I dont think you guys get it... *sigh*

Homosexuality is JUST like heterosexuality, 2 adults who love each other expressing that love... IT IS NOTHING like a man who desires to have sex with a child. Pedopheliacs dont care if its a male or female often and will have sex with it without even knowing it... or atleast get off on it, which is mental rape in ways.

Quit saying its "like" soemthing because its not, its on its own, its evil, and its manipulative

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alice

Homosexuality is JUST like heterosexuality, 2 adults who love each other expressing that love... IT IS NOTHING like a man who desires to have sex with a child. Pedopheliacs dont care if its a male or female often and will have sex with it without even knowing it... or atleast get off on it, which is mental rape in ways.

---

What.

Quote:

---

Quit saying its "like" soemthing because its not, its on its own, its evil, and its manipulative

---

No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kawaii Ryûkishi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alice

Homosexuality is JUST like heterosexuality, 2 adults who love each other expressing that love... IT IS NOTHING like a man who desires to have sex with a child. Pedopheliacs dont care if its a male or female often and will have sex with it without even knowing it... or atleast get off on it, which is mental rape in ways.

---

What.

Quote:

---

Quit saying its "like" soemthing because its not, its on its own, its evil, and its manipulative

---

No.

---

I can make sense of what Alice was saying but I dont get Kishis post :confused:

I figure that we have to keep them out of society forever. No cure seems possible, and I don't think it's a good idea to allow them to be anywhere near a kid when they feel the urge, because they will act upon those urges eventually. So we have a few choices.

First -- shoot 'em. Not the most humane thing ever, but there is no chance that they'd escape. And you'd get plenty of volenteers to throw the switch.

Second -- High Security Prison. From their perspective, far better than execution. The problem here is that the prison is expensive.

Third -- Leper colony approach. Get an unoccupied island, throw up a fence and leave them there. Cheap, except for the initial cost of the fence. Rebuild alcatraz or something.

Fourth -- Electronic monitoring. Chaep yes, but who's gonna be watching 24/7 to make sure that he doesn't get near a kid. Actually proposed in Florida.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

In another way of looking at this, i feel that pedophilla is nothing different than hetrosexuals, homosexuals or anything, it just is. You obvoiusly do not wake up in the morning and say i like *insert whatever here* sexually today and yup thats what i am going to like. I know its sorta overdone this example, but it holds true, you cant really force yourself to be like this.

I have nothing against pedophilla as long as the person does not harm anyone in liking their fetish or whatever. I do not view it as a disease, i rarely do view things that way, just because it is different and somewhat taboo to us does not mean that we are to say EVIL and start hating on it, its better to just look at it plainly without bias and see what it is. Its just a fetish of some sort, suppressed because many people in this society comdemn it, making it even more forbidden and tempting. I pity them, not because they have that feeling, but because society shuns them and they usually end up hurting the child (now if the child is not hurt [in every way possible] i couldnt care less, thats just me, think of what you will).

So in short, i dont see what pedophilla itself is a big deal, i do see why people are concerned because many children do get harmed by them, but about pedophilla itself only, i see no problem with it.

---

>>> My thoughts exactly..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gnostic Yevon

I figure that we have to keep them out of society forever. No cure seems possible, and I don't think it's a good idea to allow them to be anywhere near a kid when they feel the urge, because they will act upon those urges eventually. So we have a few choices.

First -- shoot 'em. Not the most humane thing ever, but there is no chance that they'd escape. And you'd get plenty of volenteers to throw the switch.

Second -- High Security Prison. From their perspective, far better than execution. The problem here is that the prison is expensive.

Third -- Leper colony approach. Get an unoccupied island, throw up a fence and leave them there. Cheap, except for the initial cost of the fence. Rebuild alcatraz or something.

Fourth -- Electronic monitoring. Chaep yes, but who's gonna be watching 24/7 to make sure that he doesn't get near a kid. Actually proposed in Florida.

---

What are you? 8?

Paedophilia is a disgusting crime, and personally, I think offenders should receive the death penalty. Thankfully, there is not a lot of it in Britain, but it does happen.

Uh, Alice, homosexuality, heterosexuality, and pedophelia are all EXACTLY like one another. Sexual orientations are a complete mystery, but they behave exactly like one another in all notable ways. The only thing that differs is the object of the desire... but the desire itself is the same.

I know you'd like to believe that pedophiles are monsters, I know I would love dearly to say "they're not human" and leave it at that. I don't know what makes them what they are, no more than I know what makes one strait or gay, but it's all different facets of the same thing.

What makes pedophelia forbidden isn't about the desire, it's about the ACT itself. Children cannot understand what's happening, they can't participate, and the emotional trauma is profound... as a psychologist, I know full well the damage that child molesters leave in their wake. Little difference between a child molester or a strait/gay rapist. Except, children are less equipped to deal with, or recover from, such acts.

I think people are viewing this wrong, pedophilla is a sexual fetish, not a crime itself. A crime however would be child molestation/rape/whatever. Pedophilla itself is quite simply, feeling sexually oriented to someone that is underaged (how underaged is up to you now).

Frankly, i feel people that use the dealth penalty or say they should die or *insert torture here* are no better off than anyone committing the crime(molestation/rape/etc...not pedophillia) themselves. I would sugguest maybe talking to the person to actually initiated on their fantasies, and maybe try to pinpoint the problem and help them out. However that does not mean they did not commit offense, but saying they need to die for that seems a bit harsh IMO. Some time under bars and maybe some psychological help to control their sexual desires so they wont harm a child.

Now the question i am wondering is, what if the child is consent and wants it? Sure the child might not know enough, but what if he/she said yes? and in the end the child and the adult had a real relationship that wasnt so bad off? Would that change anything? Of course this ignores legal actions taken upon the person but i am just presenting the case that, in the event the child is not mentally scarred, but actually had a real relationship that lasted through the years, would people view it any different than other relationships?

EDIT: Usunda- I wouldnt know about child having to participate or not, but from what i read when i was curious one time...a child even before puberty, CAN orgasm and the sort, however they will not produce any sperm or semen of the sort. I even went to some msg boards where people said they have done that stuff, but it was just a dry ejaculation and it has no difference to any of the orgasms that we feel when we have puberty(except of course its no longer a dry one).

What i am trying to say is, i aint sure if a child can participate or not, they obviously could to some degree if they are conscious to what they are doing (and i feel some are more than others...we give children too little credit sometimes).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

EDIT: Usunda- I wouldnt know about child having to participate or not, but from what i read when i was curious one time...a child even before puberty, CAN orgasm and the sort, however they will not produce any sperm or semen of the sort. I even went to some msg boards where people said they have done that stuff, but it was just a dry ejaculation and it has no difference to any of the orgasms that we feel when we have puberty(except of course its no longer a dry one).

What i am trying to say is, i aint sure if a child can participate or not, they obviously could to some degree if they are conscious to what they are doing (and i feel some are more than others...we give children too little credit sometimes).

---

That's sick that that is actually known. :/

Its not sick, its just real. Plus i am sure it was plenty pleasureable for them, google it if you like. Its nothing sick at all...i dont see where people get that @_@ why be sick of something that could happen with your body? But eh personal things...

i really dont see how its sick, i think its just more suppressed between people, you DONT say this to other people hence it would be more known. I mean you dont go up to your friend and go "o hey around 8 i did...blah blah". But to me its not a surprise at all, it just happens, some of us become sexually aware eariler than others, so whats the difference here? @_@ *ends rambling..*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alice

Pedophelia is not a sexual orientation... if it were then ud chose male over female children, when in actuality u just like em young.. thats not an orientation, that is a fetish... i dont think u know what these words mean so go look em up,

---

So, what's my orientation? I'm bisexual, by your logic, I can't exist. Just because pedophelia is an has nothing to do with gender, does not disqualify it from being an orientation. Oh, and a great many pedophiles do prefer male or female over the other. Can't tell you why it works differently from case to case. My guess is that one can have more than one orientation at a time, hence bisexuals/etc.

I don't know why you can't understand that... que sera, sera.

EDIT: Uh, Catboy, that's just sick... and actually, one cannot achieve climax until a certain point in puberty, which (to your credit) does usually occur before fertility, it has to do with how the brain works. The nerves just aren't connected right until that time. But EVEN IF said child (early teen) enjoys the activity, that doesn't mitigate the emotional damage. In fact, it might sometimes create worse issues than typical molestation. Hard to tell, it's often very hard to tell due to all kinds of mitigating details.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

one cannot achieve climax until a certain point in puberty.

---

I've been climaxing since I was 8 years old. I also don't see how a child experimenting with their bodily reactions is sick. I think you're the sick one for condemning them for their curiosity.

I have links if you want them Usunda, if you want PM me, i think its too much for a forum for public anyway.

They could climax with pleasure just no sperm. Its dry is all. I dont think it necessarily will create emotional damage, it might not, i mean with the right nuturing we might just get someone who is more sexually open about these things where sex is NOT something forbidden or something like that. And i see nothing wrong with that really.

Yeah its your body its good to know more about it when you can and if its this form then yeah go ahead. Just because you think its sick doesnt mean the act itself is that.

EDIT: Just wanna make it clear, orgasm and ejaculation are seperate.

Well, that's nice to know...:barf:

No, its not nice to talk about how sexually advanced children are but comments like "omfgUarzsickz!" in a thread that ties in with just that is childish. The facts may not be nice but theyre still the facts so if you dont want to hear it I wouldnt ask for it or read it.

I would have no problem with a 8-10 or so year old had a relationship with an older person.

However ONLY if the child was mentally matured enough to understand. I imagine most are not. This ain't that they derive pleasure.. this is that they understand what a relationship is and want to commence one. I don't think I have yet meet one person that young who understood those things... but then again.. I tend not to "hang" wiht people that much younger then me... wonder if I have some prejudice there.. perhaps.

Before I run about shouting "I DISAGREE I DISAGREE" I want to point out some things that, while they are NOT known fact, ARE on scientific horizons as we speak, and will perhaps let themselves be known in due time.

First of all, there does SEEM to be a difference betweem homo/heterosexuality and sexual paraphilias. That difference being that it is possible that most sexual paraphilias are due to external events and a person's enviornment, while its possible that homo/heterosexuality is at least in part, determined genetically. No, there is no concrete evidence to PROVE either of these things, but neither is there concrete evidence to disprove either of these things. My point is that while homo/heterosexuality is possibly a very natural condition, paraphilias usually aren't. (By natural, I mean something that would have happened anyway, regardless of enviornment).

Bisexuality, as far as my readings have taken me, is still very mysterious. Some people classify it as a paraphilia and some don't. Also, please remember that in the above I'm discussing theory, yes, but VERY plausible theory.

Second of all, we all like weird stuff. Hell, you can even blame pedophilia on ancient women who started shaving all their hair off to look younger and more appealing to their mates. However, any action that involves bridging the gap between a paraphilia fantasy and the real world IS wrong. Even looking at something in real life is taboo. Think it's a double standard? How do you feel when people leer at you? I'm not a child, and I haven't had the appearance of a child for some time in my life, but I STILL don't like it when men, even attractive men, stare at any part of me. If you like to fantisize about children, well if you told me that I might think it was awful. But you don't have to tell me that, do you? Just like I don't have to tell you about MY weird fantasies.

Lastly, a person that can rub their genetalia can experience pleasurable sensations typically associated with climax. This includes children.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necronopticous

I've been climaxing since I was 8 years old.

---

>>> soo.. i wasnt the only one.. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

Uh, Alice, homosexuality, heterosexuality, and pedophelia are all EXACTLY like one another. Sexual orientations are a complete mystery, but they behave exactly like one another in all notable ways. The only thing that differs is the object of the desire... but the desire itself is the same.

I know you'd like to believe that pedophiles are monsters, I know I would love dearly to say "they're not human" and leave it at that. I don't know what makes them what they are, no more than I know what makes one strait or gay, but it's all different facets of the same thing.

What makes pedophelia forbidden isn't about the desire, it's about the ACT itself. Children cannot understand what's happening, they can't participate, and the emotional trauma is profound... as a psychologist, I know full well the damage that child molesters leave in their wake. Little difference between a child molester or a strait/gay rapist. Except, children are less equipped to deal with, or recover from, such acts.

---

I completely agree. How can somebody say homosexuality is perfectly acceptable, but that paedophilia is somehow sick and disgusting? As far as I'm concerned, they're both sick and unnatural, but at least homosexuals I don't look down on simply because I disagree with their sexual preference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fire_of_avalon

That difference being that it is possible that most sexual paraphilias are due to external events and a person's enviornment, while its possible that homo/heterosexuality is at least in part, determined genetically.

---

Of course. Homosexuality is genetic. Just like celebacy :rolleyes2: . It's not a subject of what can and can't be proven, it's what can and can't be logically supported by scientific evidence. Paedophilia and homosexuality are alike in the sense that not only is it an attraction that is unnatural for reproduction, but that nobody knows exactly what causes it. A lot of people have different beliefs as to what leads to certain attractions, but none have been proven, and very few have any evidence at all that can be logically used to support them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

I would have no problem with a 8-10 or so year old had a relationship with an older person. ... However ONLY if the child was mentally matured enough to understand.

---

If I have an eight-year-old daughter and I find out she's having a sexual relationship with an older guy, he'll be lucky if I don't beat him to death. But I'll do my best to do just that. No child at eight or ten years old is mature enough to carry on a physical relationship. Hell, most teenagers aren't mature enough to carry on a physical relationship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

I completely agree. How can somebody say homosexuality is perfectly acceptable, but that paedophilia is somehow sick and disgusting? As far as I'm concerned, they're both sick and unnatural, but at least homosexuals I don't look down on simply because I disagree with their sexual preference.

---

Yeah, because we know a relationship between two consenting adults is just the same as 40 yr old dude screwing a 6 year old. Yep! :greenie:

Put everything else aside: all the theories, all the scientific findings, ect. and lets just pretend homosexuality and pedophilia are both just something people wake up one day and decide they're going to practice by sheer will (that's smurfing stupid btw): The bottom line is with pedophiles, there's a child, who not in control, and is, by definition, reguardless, being raped. Someone is being hurt. A child is being hurt. But with homosexuality, it's between two consenting people, just like heterosexuals. So why the hell should you care?

I never mentioned anything about making homosexual sex illegal, or imprisoning/torturing/killing those who act on their homosexuality. This thread isn't about homosexuality, it's about paedophilia, and the actions of paedophilia. If we relate heterosexuality to homosexuality, in which both cases involve consenting adults, then we could also involve prostitution, which involves two consenting adults, or beastiality, if we make a rule that it's alright as long as the animal doesn't try to get away. Hey, it's all within consent, right?

According to some people here, the old man and the child are both consenting, which would mean that's perfectly acceptable in some cases. Is that right? Of course it's a matter of opinion, and we all have our own. Just like how you think that it's stupid to say choice plays a part in determining sexual orientation, and how I think saying "smurfing" anything is stupid.

If you read the rest of my latest post here, I further describe the relationship between "sexual orientations" such as homosexuality and paedophilia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

I think saying "smurfing" anything is stupid.

---

We have a swear filter here that automatically changes the "F-word" to "smurf." Just so you know.

Eight or ten year olds should not be having a sexual relationship ^^ It doesn't matter if they feel pleasure off of it or not. Moral values aside, they should be given the chance to make the decision of whether they want to have casual sex or want to actually save themselves for someone that they will love romantically, and at that age, they most likely don't know about this. Sex is such a big deal in society. :)

Wow. So you can't even say "smurf" without it being changed? What a crock.

(EDIT: That ^ was a test. You were right. Weird.)

I stand corrected. I guess my mentioning of how stupid saying "smurfing" anything something was looks pretty ignorant now, as it was. Ah, what the hell.

Beastiality wouldn't be the same. :exdee: If a child is getting molested and doesn't try to get away, that's hardly consenting. An animal could never consent...I'm assuming that you were being sarcastic on that one....or I hope you were. :exdee:

A child could "consent" in a sense, but it's just like a child could sign a legally binding contract if legal...but do children understand all the details? Are the fit and ready to do such, ect? No. It's the same thing. Plus it's kind of hard to consent to sex when you don't know what it is.

Did I ever say anything about prostitution? I think prostitution should be legal. I'm in complete support of prostitution being legal. It's rediculous that it's not to me. I have no clue why you randomly brought that up.

The reason I said such though is because you were the one saying pedophilia and homosexuality were pretty much the same....and well...no...just no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alice

Pedophelia is not a sexual orientation... if it were then ud chose male over female children, when in actuality u just like em young.. thats not an orientation, that is a fetish... i dont think u know what these words mean so go look em up,

---

So, what's my orientation? I'm bisexual, by your logic, I can't exist. Just because pedophelia is an has nothing to do with gender, does not disqualify it from being an orientation. Oh, and a great many pedophiles do prefer male or female over the other. Can't tell you why it works differently from case to case. My guess is that one can have more than one orientation at a time, hence bisexuals/etc.

I don't know why you can't understand that... que sera, sera.

EDIT: Uh, Catboy, that's just sick... and actually, one cannot achieve climax until a certain point in puberty, which (to your credit) does usually occur before fertility, it has to do with how the brain works. The nerves just aren't connected right until that time. But EVEN IF said child (early teen) enjoys the activity, that doesn't mitigate the emotional damage. In fact, it might sometimes create worse issues than typical molestation. Hard to tell, it's often very hard to tell due to all kinds of mitigating details.

---

I'm still a virgin but my friend since he was 11 has been screwing aorund with chicks ever since.

Another thing is private parts are sensitive even before one can ejaculate.Children touch themselves all the time heck if you had or have children then they have done it and you never knew.

Quite frankly even if it is a fetish they might not have chosen to become that way. You dont go up to a porn site and go tentacle hentai is my thing and forever i will love people getting screwed by tentacles.

So what if a child is consenting and likes it? What if the adult and child grow up and actually have a meaningful relationship? IT could happen you know? Would it be any different for you then to look upon it? Who are we to tell that they cant have a relationship? As parents? Maybe...but you can relate that to people seperating you from your friend...

Now if you want to talk beastality that is just pure sex, zoophilla is the love someone feels about another species and i dont think its too far-fetched too. But i wont get into that.

In any case for me, if its not "natural" to you doesnt mean its not natural at all, so i just accept that some people do that and as long as no one is hurt i dont care. Pedophilla in and of itself is not harmful, just those that force it upon children(and if children want it then would it still be forcing? I wouldnt think so).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMKA

An animal could never consent

---

http://www.sexwork.com/family/dolphins1.html

A little explict but i think the point is made. We dont konw if other species can consent or not, they might or might not theres no concrete proof IMO that they are any less consenting or intellectual than us(although maybe on an entirely different level, not to be confused with higher or lower however). I think other speicies can have feelings, although some might have it differently than us necessarily. I feel we need to know we arent the only species upon this planet and that we arent necessarily the "king" of them all as well. But thats another thread.

Who says they cant feel love?

Uh, children are damaged by seuxal relations so early... ALWAYS and REGARDLESS of the situations leading up to or past the events. At the very least, you get diseases like nymphomania (and it is a disease, please make very sure you know what your talking about before arguing against THAT) or drug abuse. And at worst, suicidal or homicidal behavior.

Memory surpressions/brainwashing are the most common nature of problems. You heard me, "brainwashing"... children simply do not understand what's going on, they don't have the capacity, and that confusion/etc. alone is MORE than enough to scar someone for life.

Simply put, it's not sane to believe a child could be exposed to this and not be harmed. Actually, any relationship between a younger teen and an adult is extremely damaging to the child (and they are still children). It's not healthy. Never has been healthy. Never will be healthy.

And, as for animals... ewww... but, whatever. They're just animals... but ewww... then again, I've done things that would get the same reaction, I'm sure. Always consenting adult(s), but still weird.

Its a little too much to say always isnt it? I am sure more often than not its bad, but i wouldnt know if it ever did good for once..who knows? It COULD at the very least. I dont know about the disease though.

Maybe it never will be healthy but i dont konw, most people do it for the sex itself, what if its not for the sex? Lets say it did work out fine...would it be viewed upon as anything different? I would assume no...because i feel the primary reason why we dont like this is because more often than not it happens to harm the child is all. Not necessarily pedophilla itself.

Nah i know your views differ on mine on other species out there, but there are people out there regardless of what you think. I dont mind, i wish that they are happy and fine with their lives. It doesnt really bother me that much, as long as they are happy and no one is hurt, i wouldnt mind. I would not say that they cannot feel love as well, that is unfair. But that is of course me, you may feel differently however.

.............well theres only one way to deal with a pervert............................ :chop: ......and thats how

So we are going to kill like over 95% of the population becuase they are perverts and enjoy sex? >_> Sorry i just find the really dumb.

Like I was saying, beastiality isn't my buisiness. My concern is about people... and considering my area of specialty was child developement, them especially. There is no reasonable way to expect ANY child to be so inclined. Hence, always, rape. And even if it was concensual (highly unlikely), the emotional connection would be impossibly mismatched.

Now, if someone had a strange glandular thing and never left a child-like biological state, that's different. The time to mature and develop mentally and emotionally enough to handle an adult relationship is, by definition, necessary. People don't maturate to even starting that state until in their mid teens, and usually don't finish it until they're in their mid 20's... which is why relationships fail more often in the younger group. One must come to understand oneself first... and it's not fair or right to expect that of a child.

And, no, there is no reasonable way to expect a child not to come out of such a relationship with (undue) emotional damage. Probably ruining any chance of them ever having a healthy love life... but, that's just the usual chain of events, there are variations. The human mind/soul/whatever... in a lot of ways is as predictable as the human body. This is the equivilant of being tossed out of the 20th story of a building to land on the concrete below. It's not a matter of IF it will hurt, just how much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

Uh, children are damaged by seuxal relations so early... ALWAYS and REGARDLESS of the situations leading up to or past the events. At the very least, you get diseases like nymphomania (and it is a disease, please make very sure you know what your talking about before arguing against THAT) or drug abuse. And at worst, suicidal or homicidal behavior.

Memory surpressions/brainwashing are the most common nature of problems. You heard me, "brainwashing"... children simply do not understand what's going on, they don't have the capacity, and that confusion/etc. alone is MORE than enough to scar someone for life.

Simply put, it's not sane to believe a child could be exposed to this and not be harmed. Actually, any relationship between a younger teen and an adult is extremely damaging to the child (and they are still children). It's not healthy. Never has been healthy. Never will be healthy.

And, as for animals... ewww... but, whatever. They're just animals... but ewww... then again, I've done things that would get the same reaction, I'm sure. Always consenting adult(s), but still weird.

---

well no one is saying that.we said pediohillia is a fetish adult males have heck the ones who have the fetish is as harmless as taking some child's pic.and flipping his dolphin to it.Though that is sick as hell in my opinion.But another thing is someone in here said pedophillia is associated with homosexuallity.Thats not true since when has children had one gender?Another thing is uduna your right whenever the pedphillia guy actaully stops spanking it to pics of children they move on to the big leagues and rapes a child and that scars a child for life.

It's only wrong because it's Illegal I don't hate pedos JUST because they are like that. Let me explain if a peadophile was to rape/molest a child they should be arrested - not because of what they are but because of what they've done if the child/teen is fully agreed to it (And that person who said they wouldn't know - that's wrong) It's okay by me (Even if the pigs don't think so) I say if you love someone it doesn't matter who they are.

What upsets me is that some (Not all) Pedos are probly realy decent people but just because they are pedophiles (How many spellings have I done now?) they are automatcally "evil" even if they're not the type of pedos that rape/molest. That is sad you got to admit wether you hate them or not :crying: the thing is the pedos them selves must be suffering too because they are pedos they can't help who they are.


But no matter what happens I am a religous person and I know that God understands their pain and when they die they'll go to heavan like everyone else.

pedos are trash on this planet.. kill'em all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MJN SEIFER

It's only wrong because it's Illegal I don't hate pedos JUST because they are like that. Let me explain if a peadophile was to rape/molest a child they should be arrested - not because of what they are but because of what they've done if the child/teen is fully agreed to it (And that person who said they wouldn't know - that's wrong) It's okay by me (Even if the pigs don't think so) I say if you love someone it doesn't matter who they are.

What upsets me is that some (Not all) Pedos are probly realy decent people but just because they are pedophiles (How many spellings have I done now?) they are automatcally "evil" even if they're not the type of pedos that rape/molest. That is sad you got to admit wether you hate them or not :crying: the thing is the pedos them selves must be suffering too because they are pedos they can't help who they are.


But no matter what happens I am a religous person and I know that God understands their pain and when they die they'll go to heavan like everyone else.

---

I wish everyone was as understanding as you @_@;; I feel age shouldnt matter too much as long as both people care about one another and have that intent of love.

Has someone been making multiple accounts?

(What other opinions would be expected than "I say if you love someone it doesn't matter who they are. [Even if they're eight years old.]" from somebody who announces themself as a supporter of Micheal Jackson? Talk about paedophiles and child molesters...)

A while ago, homosexuality was considered vile, disgusting, and unnatural. Now, I still consider it as such, but society has changed their views on this and accepted it as simply an "alternative" to heterosexuality. Paedophilia (or carrying it out, rather, in child molestation) and beastiality are still, as far as I know, considered to be pretty damn sick. As they should be.

The italicised is paraphrased and/or quoted directly from another member, through instant messaging.

Alfred Kinsey was the first one to normalize homosexuality, and his research in "sexuality and the human male" and "sexuality and the human female", so flawed it simply has to be fixed [(as in rigged, not in need of repair)], was used in the 1968 decision by the APA [(American Psychiatric Association...also my (Sasquatch) initials--just a coincidence)] to declassify homosexuality as a sexual disorder. It's the same research that NAMBLA [(North American Man-Boy Love Association)] is now using to lobby for the declassification of pedophilia.

Among Kinsey's tricks was to take 25% of his surveys among convicted prisoners--not exactly an accurate profile of the population. In "Sexuality and the human female" he considered prostitutes and any woman living with the same man for more than a year as "married women". And page 33 of "Sexuality and the Human Male" has a little chart... times to reach orgasm, for boys ranging from 14 years to 5 months.

The two men who killed 10-year-ol Jeffery Curley while trying to kidnap him for rape were both members [of NAMBLA]. His parents are suing, and the ACLU is defending them.

Kinsey made it clear in his statements that he thought people should experience a variety of sex--heterosexual, homosexual, group, beastiality, etc.--~before~ age 6---before "preconcieved notions" set in.

One of his little advancements was the seven-point scale, with heterosexuality at one extreme and homosexuality at the other, to make it appear that both were equally extreme and bisexuality was the norm. That was in "sexuality and the Human Male" published in 1948; my psychiatry teacher in college showed it to us as "the latest research".

lionx, I don't believe Garnet was referring to all perverted people in general. Only those who enjoy sex with children ("consent" or no), and possibly others equally as disturbed.

I still just can't comprehend how someone could look at pedophilia, beastiality and homosexuality being equivalent...and I honestly don't believe anyone actually does. Infact, I refuse to believe someone is that....well...use your imagination to finish the sentence negatively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrgen

http://www.sexwork.com/family/dolphins1.html

---

:exdee::exdee::exdee::exdee::exdee::exdee::exdee:

The difference between peadophilia and homosexuality is that the physical act of being homosexual is sex. The physical act of peadophilia is rape.

To me if its consenting i cant see too much of a problem either way. You might think differently but i dont see it as anything different.

I dont see how homosexuality is an alternative, i think its in a class of its own as much as any of the other forms out there including hetrosexuality and stuff. I do not consider hetrosexuality the norm, i dont really consider any of them the norm, just what it is, and thats what people like. I actually find prejudice that comes from some people sick more than someone loving another person of the same sex or of a different species. The most disturbed are those that hate another because they are different, for to me does it matter if they dont bother you? No.

DMKA i actually dont think it was that funny that article, becuase obviously there are people out there like that. They usually get shunned by other forums and i think i know someone from another forum that is like that and he is a pretty nice person in general. I find he is the normal person just like you and me, he just has a different preference, and who are you to say its less meaningful? Its not even your thing.

So yeah :exdee: to the haters.

I still think that if a child is consenting, its not really rape...because they are willing to do it whether their mind are up to snuff or not. And despite what you think, if the person cares i think it wouldnt be so bad for both of them, maybe in a different world it might even be fine to us. it just so happens that more often than not it does hurt the child, and thats where i dont like about it and i think most people have a problem with(which is logical to be concerned of).

I also feel everyone should be bisexual in a way, less hate in general wouldnt it? Least we wont have any of that homosexual prejudice.

u kidding right?

It's not ALWAYS rape. I was a kid my self you know...

I laughed my ass off at that site. The sad thing is that it's true, and there really are people out that that are like that.

And that's right, DMKA. You just keep on thinking that everybody who disagrees with you is such a bad person.

"The difference between peadophilia and homosexuality is that the physical act of being homosexual is sex. The physical act of peadophilia is rape."

I would agree with that, but I would also point out that it's the only difference.

As for the other primary post, I don't think that even warrants a reply. Comedic relief abounds in this forum.

(EDIT: So we have one guy talking about how it's perfectly natural to want to have sex with anything and everything--from people of the same sex, to children, to animals--and his sidekick in the argument, who's sig translates into "little hampsters, big adventures", and who is an open supporter of Micheal Jackson, a known paedophile and child molester. Tell me people take this seriously.)

Michael Jackson is not a paedophile. I should know as I have been around many so I can pick them out easily.

Quote:

---

(EDIT: So we have one guy talking about how it's perfectly natural to want to have sex with anything and everything--from people of the same sex, to children, to animals--and his sidekick in the argument, who's sig translates into "little hampsters, big adventures", and who is an open supporter of Micheal Jackson, a known paedophile and child molester. Tell me people take this seriously.)

---

Quote:

---

And that's right, DMKA. You just keep on thinking that everybody who disagrees with you is such a bad person.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MJN SEIFER

Michael Jackson is not a paedophile. I should know as I have been around many so I can pick them out easily.

---

Hate to tell you, but NO ONE can "pick them out easily". Unless you walk in on one while he's pleasuring himself to a recording of his 9yo. daughter's ballerina recital. That's a solid givaway. They come in every shape and size. Race, gender, (post-pubescent) age, creed, country, language, or any social denomination, you'll find pedophiles are usually as ordinary as everyone else (except that distinction).

Look, young teens, even children can and have been seduced. It really was seduction, the children have as much as said it when they were older. But, the shame, the emotional damage, it doesn't change if the child agrees or fights back or anything. It doesn't change, never changes, to believe a child can be in a healthy sexual/romantic relationship with an adult truly is insane.

Oh, and the definition of insanity "repeating the same action over and over again, yet expecting a different outcome" is exactly the right word. Because the outcome is always the same: permament damage to the child which will last, probably, their entire lives. Which have a tendancy to end with suicide or drug overdose. You damn them to never being able to hold a stable relationship, at very least. Because some pervert put their "love" over the well-being of the child, that child will suffer for the rest of his/her life.

I've seen it too often, I've personally treated some of them. I've talked to them, listened to their stories, the entire time calming them and helping them... the entire time... wishing that I could somehow satisfy my desire to kill those monsters with my bare hands. Anyone who knows the aftermath could NEVER condone the act... except other monsters.

It's one of the reason I quit psychology... I couldn't seperate from my emotions enough to effectively help. Every time, I got a little closer to just throwing away my resistance, hunting down, and torturing those scumbags until they begged me for death. The difference between my and they becomes clearest at this point: they give to their temptation, I resist mine.

I think you are a kind and accepting person Sasquatch i am pretty sure all your posts are filled with it.

I think whatever that you prefer, but doesnt hurt anyone, is fine. Does it bother you? Not unless you make it. I find it even more sad that people would just be all shun-ish to people that have different tastes.

Maybe its the mindset that things wont ever be better that stop is from being so. I honestly doubt that it is insane at all, if you think so, then i am insane, but from my viewpoint thats not true. Its only true if you think it is.

I know someone who is homosexual and was raped many times and hurt becuase of that in the place that he lives. Now he is fine and i really think he could have a relationship. Its hard i would know that but he is working his way around it and i truly believe that with effort he can make a lasting relationship. I dont like what the people did because they did not agree with his orientation, but i really cannot bring myself to kill anyone...and well lets just say i think this is the exception not the norm. if you think i am a monster for thinking this way then fine, but i am really sure, things would work out for this person.

If you really wanna know about this, the person is in a relationship where the person is 18, and he is 14, relationship and things seem to be fine the way it is and with effort i think it would be fine.

Quote:

---

The difference between my and they becomes clearest at this point: they give to their temptation, I resist mine.

---

And we should try to focus on that rather than the killing.

...yes u are insane

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

Maybe its the mindset that things wont ever be better that stop is from being so. I honestly doubt that it is insane at all, if you think so, then i am insane, but from my viewpoint thats not true. Its only true if you think it is.

---

Yep, and if we stop believing in gravity, maybe IT will stop, too. I do believe I used the analogy that it's like tossing someone out the 20th story building to land on the concrete below. The damage is inevitable, the only question is how much. Some get up and limp away, others are destroyed entirely.

Quote:

---

The difference between my and they becomes clearest at this point: they give to their temptation, I resist mine.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

And we should try to focus on that rather than the killing.

---

Focus on what? That I'm a decent human being, and they are not? I already know this, thank you.

Oh, and you really ARE insane. Denial is a form of insanity, FYI.

Micheal Jackson is a paedophile and a child molester, it just hasn't (yet) been proven in court. Actually, the paedophile part prettymuch has, the molestation part hasn't yet.

lionx, I apologize if you don't see me as an "accepting" person when I refuse to "accept" that it's natural or normal for somebody to want to have sex with children. (Or, in the other case, animals.) It just ain't right.

Yes, young teens and children can be "seduced". It is possible to have sexual contact with a young (very young) person that they consent to. But why do they consent? Is it because they know what's going on and want to be involved? Most likely, no. It's because children are the most gullible people in the world. Most of them will believe anything an adult tells them, especially if it's an adult they know--as far as I know, most cases of child molestation happen with somebody that hasn't just met the child, but rather with somebody that's known the child for a while and has earned their trust. A teacher, a relative, a priest, a friend of the family. Look at John Geoghen (or Geoghan?)--he was a Catholic priest and a child molester that made an effort to look for and befriend specific kinds of families, families whose young children would be not only more gullible, but more likely to keep a secret. He would visit the family and the child routinely to gain trust, then use that trust to get what he wanted from the child, and not just once but many, many times, into the child's early teen years. When he was finally caught, I think they had 80 or more proven cases against him, and that's not including all the people who were to ashamed to step up. He lasted six months in prison, until he was killed. At least he got a small taste of what he deserved--and I don't mean jail time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Destai

Quote:

---

(EDIT: So we have one guy talking about how it's perfectly natural to want to have sex with anything and everything--from people of the same sex, to children, to animals--and his sidekick in the argument, who's sig translates into "little hampsters, big adventures", and who is an open supporter of Micheal Jackson, a known paedophile and child molester. Tell me people take this seriously.)

---

---

What was the point of quoting this? It's not my opinion, it's a logical interpretation of the evidence, as presented by those two members' posts. Your post had no point, other than to try to make me look hypocritical, which didn't work.

Quote:

---

Micheal Jackson is a paedophile and a child molester, it just hasn't (yet) been proven in court. Actually, the paedophile part prettymuch has, the molestation part hasn't yet.

---

I don't think he is. Most of how he behaves is because he's childish. When children are children they have sleepovers they even sleep in the same beds some times.

Michael is just doing what people should do. He's not a pedo because he spent a lot of times with many older women (Most of them at the same time :sweatdrop: ) The problem with socity nower days is that people misread every thing because they have dirty minds.

What Jacko does arne't really "Sleepovers" as they have both boys and girls and he is just sleeping with them - that's all!

I have done it - We all have! It's what kids do (I haven done it as an adult - because i'm not an adult yet.)

I have had many girls in my bed with me ever since I was 7. We never had sex we just slept there. Is that really any diffrent to what Michael does?

I really can't picture him as a molestor or pedophile - there's too much against him at the moment.

Even if I new he was one - If some one could show me some solid proof I was wrong and he IS a pedo/molester it would shock me obvioulsly

But it would change nothing. I would still like his songs, His moves, I would still watch Hamtaro/Ham-Ham and I will still support him. I have too I owe that to him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

What was the point of quoting this? It's not my opinion, it's a logical interpretation of the evidence, as presented by those two members' posts. Your post had no point, other than to try to make me look hypocritical, which didn't work.

---

I think your opinions all over that post. Suggesting they cant be taken seriously because of what Lionx thinks and because MJN supports Micheal Jackson. Pretty similar to claiming DMKA thinks people who disagree with him are bad people.

Theres a BIG difference between accepting gravity isnt here and that we can accept different people...like how homosexuals arent readily accepted before..? And more people are accepting them now than back then? Something like that. I know you are passionately against pedos, but i disagree that they arent living beings.

What i meant was to help pedophillacs with their attraction to young kids and instead of just making them sleep with kids that might potentially harm them, to resist them better. Instead of shunning them by society looking down on them i feel we should help them with their fetish.

I think Micheal Jackson sleeps with kids, but not molests them. I really think the person did it for the money and nothing else.

The reason why i dont feel like you are an accepting person really is that, most of your posts seem to have a very sarcastic and opinionated way of talking to me when i dont feel i provoked anything but put things on the table to discuss. I certainetly understand where you and the people that have differing opinions about mine come from, somehow it never seems to be reciprocated these days by people. -_-;

If i am insane to you Usunda, so be it. I certainetly dont feel so but if i am, thats me and thats just...too bad. I just refuse to be cruel to people especially when they have different likings or helping them when they got differences that arent easily accepted by society. And you can think what you will about that.

No, you said that if the relationship was consensual, then it was OK. I'm telling you that such a concept is pure insanity. The damage is inevitable, and often irrepairable. To believe anything but pain can come to the child is, in fact, insanity.


I think that yes, pedophiles should be treated in any way possible. Child molesters, they should be experimented upon to find said treatments... and a few other things in the meantime. I still think that castration is the best of all possible choices at our current level of medical science. Because, frankly, there is no "cure"... anymore than one could "cure" hetero or homo sexualities.

If you think thats pure insanity thats fine, because i certainetly think that this relationship with the 14 and 18 year old people can work out despite the bumps it might face. If you think thats insanity so be it, but i certainetly think it can, and we can agree to disagree here if you want.

I agree that the poor 14yr-old is being used... that he's being, for all intents, molested... DESPITE so-called "consent". What could mess them up enough to think their relationship is healthy, I'll never know. Same goes for you, and others like you. But any child molester goes within sight range of my younger relatives, and nothing but death will save them from me.

I think its equally messed up to think that things wont work out and are in fact twisted just because they do not fit your style of thinking and realm of sanity.

I know them, and if i dont then i be damned, but i have absolute faith in them. The 14 year old has been raped not only once too, and the person accepts him for that, i think anything is possible especially when it does come to love..maybe you have less faith for humanity but even with some of the negativity i seen in that, i dont think this will foul up.

Uh, an 18 year old who likes a 14 year old isn't being a pedophile. That's only 4 year difference. An unhealthy relationship, I'd say, but no pedophilism is involved. 20 and 12? I'll give you that.

How is that unhealthy..?

What is considered pedophism then? I mean whats the age gap? Or is it not talked about its subjective?

This thread is floundering... I think everybody should keep in mind the following:

The purpose of sexual intercourse is to reproduce. That's it, plain and simple. No sex = no kids = (eventually) no more H. Sap.

Heterosexuality is natural--attraction between a man and a woman. This is what nature intended, because try as they might, two men or two women cannot get each other pregnant.

Homosexuality is a genetic error, because as mentioned, it takes a man and a woman to make a baby. (I am not trying to gay-bash, I'm simply pointing out the facts.)

Pedophilia is unnatural--attraction of an adult to a child. Since children (by which I mean pre-pubescents) are physically incapable of breeding, there is absolutely no reason for them to mate. This is similar to homosexuality in that regard.

Pedophilia itself is considered a large problem mainly because very few like the thought of it, but also because, as mentioned, children end up physcially and emotionally harmed by child molestation (the typical sexual outlet for pedophiles). Homosexuality is not considered a huge problem because it's between two consenting homosexuals. Heterosexuality is not considered a problem at all mainly because the majority of people are heterosexual, but also because male-female sexual relationships produce the next generation.

Obviously, some homosexuals and heterosexuals rape people--pedophiles are not alone there--but they are less likely to rape because their desires aren't as taboo and have more legal outlets. Also, they typically engage in sex with those who are old enough to have some understanding, as opposed to the innocent seven-year-old.

Sexual intercourse although basically was to make babies, doesnt mean that way these days. I can easily have sex with a women to make them pregnant and then go back to liking men if i was homosexual. If its a genetic error i would think other species out there wont do that stuff too. Or maybe you are just going by reproduction in which i think sex has become more than that lately.

If its natural i would think that anyone out there that likes anything else be it homosexuality, pedo, scat, and any other fetish out there to be genetically dysfuctional then? If thats so, how many people out there are screwed up?

EDIT: I agree though that since alot of the times(alot not all becuase saying all in anything is too far) the child does get hurt from pedo.

I find myself agreeing with Catboy, go figure... sex isn't about *just* reproduction... if it was, humans would be unable to feel love.

However, most "fetishes" are paraphelias... and THOSE are similar in nature to phobias (only in the oposite direction)... irational desires to perform some action for a sexual purpose. Some are appearantly just a "thing" that happens, and others are caused by abuse, exclusively. Very complex, too much so to explain here.

As far as anyone can tell, heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual, pedophelia and dendrophelia are NOT paraphelias. The don't behave the same way as paraphelias... in fact, they behave EXACTLY like each other.

And you can call any of them "defects" if you so desire, but they're certainly NOT genetic. Identical twins won't necessarily end up with the same sexual identities. Hence, something else... what, I cannot say, but not genes.

MJNSEIFER -- Witnesses (as in, more than one) have testified to personally seeing Jackson with his hand down the pants of little boys, sleeping naked with naked little boys, and more. Children have testified (on top of confirming the others' testimonies) that Jackson had them take sleeping pills and drink wine. On top of all that, your sig translates to "little hampsters, big adventures", a quite obvious reference to the homosexual act of placing a hampster, gerbil, et cetera into one's rectum to feel it squirm around. If and when Michael Jackson is convicted, would THAT be enough proof for you? And just because he's an excellant performer (edit: which I do agree with, he's a great performer), does that mean you should give your money to such an immoral SOB? I guess the money he gets to keep his victims silent has to come from somewhere, right?

I would agree that sex isn't just for reproduction, but I don't see where it would be impossible to love if that were the case. I believe sex was meant to be carried out within the bonds of love, not just with everybody (or everything, in some cases apparently) we want to--we've all heard the whole thing before, yadda yadda yadda--but that it's pleasurable, so it's not a limit. It's not like an "obligation" to do with somebody you love, but neither is it something that shouldn't be taken seriously.

udsuna -- What's dendrophelia? Sorry, I'm not familiar with the term--I may know what you're talking about and can't relate it to the term, but "dendrophelia" doesn't ring a bell right off the bat.

lionx has touched on something I believe I've already pointed out... What is "accepted" now is more than what was accepted in the past, and no doubt less than what will be accepted in the future. Our society is moving more and more towards a place where we can't offend anybody, everybody is special and great like they are and we're just one big happy family. Now, some of our "acceptance" could be considered progress--for example, acceptance of other races, nationalities, cultures (to an extent), females, music, you name it--but some, in the opinions of some, are considered to be something that shouldn't happen--i.e. acceptance of homosexuality as "normal", acceptance of abortion, violent or degrading culture, foreign cars, wine coolers, and tofu. (Those last three were jokes, by the way.) In fact, some people see those "progressive" acceptances as something that shouldn't have happened...there are groups of people that still believe their race is superior to others', or that females don't belong anywhere but raising children, cooking, and cleaning. But the point is, when will it be "accepted" that it's "natural" to want to have sex with animals or children? Inter-racial relationships was a big hurdle for society, as was/is homosexual relationships, when will that hurdle become inter-age relationships, or inter-species? When will society coin terms like "paedophile-phobic", when people that disagree with it are looked down on more than those who participate in it?

EDIT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

If its a genetic error i would think other species out there wont do that stuff too.

---

I had a dog one time that would hump people's legs constantly. Does that make it alright for me to do, too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Destai

I think your opinions all over that post. Suggesting they cant be taken seriously because of what Lionx thinks and because MJN supports Micheal Jackson. Pretty similar to claiming DMKA thinks people who disagree with him are bad people.

---

The guy said "use your imagination to finish that sentence negatively". That doesn't mean he's complimenting those that disagree with him, does it, slick? And the outrageous comments by the other two parties--such as saying that zoophilia and paedophilia are perfectly natural and should be accepted, or saying that Michael Jackson "is just doing what people should do"--lend a pretty good thought to the idea that they shouldn't be taken seriously. If you ran across a guy who said the earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese, would you take him seriously? Don't answer that, in fact there's no need for you to reply to me, just as there was no need for you to reply in the first place.

Now you are just demonizing them. I wouldnt trust anything from the media about him really atm with all the drama. If anything even if he is convicted, it shows nothing. Scott Peterson was found guilty and it was based on circumstancial evidence, none of that mattered after the media demonized him. Theres tons of murders in Maedesto, why wasnt he targeted for the other murders?

Some people do casual sex and do not want a lasting relationship, and its up to that person and the person he or she slept with to decide if its right or not. I mean are you going to care if someone makes your life a drama? No...why should i care what you think about me and the other person? Hate the person all you like it doesnt matter, what matters is the persons involved.

Who knows when Sasquatch? It doesnt matter though what society has to think, its up to the individual i would say. If you dont like homosexuals be that way, just dont hurt them. I certainetly feel that there is no real right and wrong because that is up to us to decide. I hope soon however.

Quote:

---

I had a dog one time that would hump people's legs constantly. Does that make it alright for me to do, too?

---

Sure if thats what you like to do. The other person might not like it but you can if you like, no one is stopping you.

Quote:

---

The guy said "use your imagination to finish that sentence negatively". That doesn't mean he's complimenting those that disagree with him, does it, slick? And the outrageous comments by the other two parties--such as saying that zoophilia and paedophilia are perfectly natural and should be accepted, or saying that Michael Jackson "is just doing what people should do"--lend a pretty good thought to the idea that they shouldn't be taken seriously. If you ran across a guy who said the earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese, would you take him seriously? Don't answer that, in fact there's no need for you to reply to me, just as there was no need for you to reply in the first place.

---

I think you shouldnt be taken seriously either by the way you responded right here, not to mention the other posts you made in just about every forum here. I never really attacked you, so why attack others? This is a discussion board, i wasnt flaming anyone so i had every right to post what i feel. I think because of your conservative and religious ways you shouldnt be taken so seriously because its so heavily biased. I think its sad that you would attack people because they are different from you, i dont have to agree with you at all to be taken seriously by some people. Instead of accepting that there are people that are different and supporting them, we shun them and think they are innatural monsters out there.

What does Micheal Jackson have to do with this besides you trying to get people that believe Jacko commited the crime to agree with you? What does me accepting people out there that like zoophilla or pedophilla all of a sudden make you more valid than meu? If you dont like it fine, no need to try to degrade others. I find you pretty outrageous at times too although i dont say that much most of the time. Plus why are you so bothered about other people and what they think? You are just going to keep being bothered or are you going to accept there are different people out there and they are happy doing something you find wierd?

If you dont like them and want to kill them, fine, just dont be afraid if you get arrested out there. Its your opinion and belief, i have mine too. Maybe we should try to accept there are different opinions besides your own out there sometime? And please please dont reply to this, no one asked you to reply to this thread at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

Now you are just demonizing them.

---

Dude, of COURSE he's demonizing them. THEY RAPE LITTLE KIDS!!!!! There is NO GREATER CRIME that a single human being can commit against another. They devestate a child's world, probably ruining them for life. And by probably, I mean that most never recover at all, ending in suicide or drug overdose or unnecessary violence. Then there's the ones who go out and repeat the crime... becoming the very monsters that created them... yes, I think the word "demon" applies well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

Some people do casual sex and do not want a lasting relationship, and its up to that person and the person he or she slept with to decide if its right or not.

---

Yeah, well, if someone wanted casual sex with me, then RAPED me, yes, it's wrong as hell. A child can't make that decision because a child does not know that distinction. Same as raping a mentally retarded adult. Pedophelia is a disturbing condition, but in and of itself, it is only a *desire*... the act of carrying it out, that's different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

Who knows when Sasquatch? It doesnt matter though what society has to think, its up to the individual i would say. If you dont like homosexuals be that way, just dont hurt them. I certainetly feel that there is no real right and wrong because that is up to us to decide

Quote:

---

I had a dog one time that would hump people's legs constantly. Does that make it alright for me to do, too?

---

Sure if thats what you like to do. The other person might not like it but you can if you like, no one is stopping you.

---

Wrong, just plain wrong. It is the first responsibility of a people to protect their society. And the first responsibility of a society to protect it's people. A society that fails to protect it's members, especially those that cannot protect themselves, has failed in the only thing it's truly meant for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

I think you shouldnt be taken seriously either by the way you responded right here, not to mention the other posts you made in just about every forum here. I never really attacked you, so why attack others? This is a discussion board, i wasnt flaming anyone so i had every right to post what i feel. I think because of your conservative and religious ways you shouldnt be taken so seriously because its so heavily biased. I think its sad that you would attack people because they are different from you, i dont have to agree with you at all to be taken seriously by some people. Instead of accepting that there are people that are different and supporting them, we shun them and think they are innatural monsters out there.

---

Actually, he was just fine in his opinions. I take everything but his sarcasm seriously. And even it is well and cleverly placed. I disagree with him in areas (myself being bisexual)... but, the issue of protecting children is more important than my and his petty difference about sexuality between adults. I think if he, I, and a child molester were all in the same room, we could co-operate long enough to beat the "demon" to death... thus doing our job to protect our society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

What does Micheal Jackson have to do with this besides you trying to get people that believe Jacko commited the crime to agree with you?

---

This, however, I have to give to you. Regardless of "evidence" and "opinion"... innocent until proven guilty. Wacco Jacko is probably guilty as sin, but, I don't know the whole story... no one here does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

What does me accepting people out there that like zoophilla or pedophilla all of a sudden make you more valid than meu? If you dont like it fine, no need to try to degrade others. I find you pretty outrageous at times too i dont say that much.

---

Actually, the fact that you refuse to even accept the evidence that you're wrong. Child molesters (and all child-adult sexual activity is molestation) DESTROY lives. As thoroughly as if they shot them.... more thoroughly, actually... the survival rates (lifespan) for gunshot victims are actually MUCH higher than that of child molestation victims. Bullets either kill or wound, wounds that heal. Molestation creates injuries that are less obvious, but just as horrific, and infinitely harder to treat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

If you dont like them and want to kill them, fine, just dont be afraid if you get arrested out there. Its your opinion and belief, i have mine too. Maybe we should try to accept there are different opinions besides your own out there sometime? And please please dont reply to this, no one asked you to reply to this thread at all.

---

Actually, wrong again. I do believe that the person who started this thread asked for opinions and responces. General call, meaning, he has as much right as you do. Really, moreso, because he's being far more civil. And, for that matter, sane. Oh, and he doesn't have to reply to you, I think I did a good job. He's right-wing, and I'm about as far "left" as they go (or, does "Goddess-worshipping, bisexual, happily promiscuous intellectual" not go far enough to qualify me)... and, somehow, we are both unified in our belief that the wellbeing of the children is more important that some weak-willed scumbag's need to get laid.

First off, I reply to this thread because I can, and I don't make posts that are specifically designed only to insult, offend, or degrade one person, with no other purpose. I can't speak for everybody when I say that though. If Destai wanted to say something to me, he or she should have done it through a PM, but instead did it publicly. You were not involved in the conversation between Destai and myself, nor is there any reason for you to be, because I'm not saying anything specifically to him or her that isn't in plain sight for you to see. Further, this thread wasn't started by you, and when I first replied, you hadn't even made your way in here yet. I was directing those comments to somebody who for some reason comes off to me as a high school freshman, and has made no posts contributing to this thread at all, only expressing his or her confusion or contempt, and not explaining such. I have no problem with somebody having a reasonable disagreement, but when one's objective is simply to degrade another person, and nothing else, that I have a problem with. If it was used as a means to an end, I would understand, otherwise, it's childish, and there's no place for it.

When did I "attack" anybody? I've said that homosexuality, paedophilia, and beastiality are not normal or natural, are you taking that to be an "attack"?

Scott Peterson was found guilty because he was guilty. There was MUCH more than just circumstantial evidence to convict him, and the media only presented him as the main suspect and the evidence--the police were accusing him of the crime, not his victims, unlike Jackson. Only a fraction of the Jackson trial is being released anyway, and jurors aren't allowed to be involved in anything outside the courtroom that might influence their decision. During selection, lawyers try to find jurors who are unexposed to the case already, so everything they hear in the trial is something new, and their mind isn't made up before they go in there. Scott Peterson wasn't targeted for any other murders because there wasn't overwhelming evidence to link him in any other murders, as there was in the murder of his wife and child.

If you're the type of person to say "oh, whatever somebody wants to do, it's their decision", then you go ahead and keep thinking that, but it's that same type of thinking that has and will further cause the downfall of our society, and we'll end up just like Soddom and Ghomorrah.

My point with the dog was to say that if you think it's natural and normal for people to want sex with anything simply because animals do it too, then it would mean that it's "normal" for people to hump the side of the couch, or their cat.

What does Michael Jackson have to do with a thread about paedophilia? Do I really need to explain this to you, or were you simply momentarily confused?

If you disagree with me, concerning this topic or any other, then say so--hell, I invite it. If you find me "pretty outrageous at times", then go ahead and say something, that's what this entire section of the forum is for.

EDIT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

Actually, he was just fine in his opinions. I take everything but his sarcasm seriously. And even it is well and cleverly placed. I disagree with him in areas (myself being bisexual)... but, the issue of protecting children is more important than my and his petty difference about sexuality between adults. I think if he, I, and a child molester were all in the same room, we could co-operate long enough to beat the "demon" to death... thus doing our job to protect our society.

---

Yes, even if you just shot my dog, I'm sure we would be able to cooperate to beat the hell out of a child molester. After that, though, you better watch out, I love my dog. But not in that way, you know. ;)

I guess Christian, gun-owning, pickup-driving, military man would go about far enough in describing my spot on the political spectrum, and quite often, I do agree with udsuna. There are things we disagree on--even with homosexuality, as I've said before, I disagree with it, but I don't resent decent homosexuals (or bisexuals) because of my stance on the morality homosexuality. Paedophiles, however, are another matter entirely.

Why does everything have to be about sex?

Yes, if someone was using another for sex, it's wrong. Expecialy when it's rape. An 18 year old can actualy have a relationship with a 14 year old, without sex. I'm absolutely possitive they can. Not everything is about sex. But I agree that rape (in any cirtcumstances) and using / molesting a child is wrong.

Hell, it's just a 4 year gap, nothing out of the ordinary, really.

Edit:
"If you're the type of person to say "oh, whatever somebody wants to do, it's their decision", then you go ahead and keep thinking that, but it's that same type of thinking that has and will further cause the downfall of our society, and we'll end up just like Soddom and Ghomorrah."

People can do whatever they want, that's not to say there aren't consiquences to it...

You do know that pedophilla and actually raping someone is different right? If its someone molesting another and raping them i would report them to the authorities as well. I meant demonizing Jacko however and i think you mistook me on that, maybe i wasnt clear enough.

What i meant on casual sex was that no one has to go by what Sasquatch said about his definition of a relationship and love and sex and whatever he said on the second paragraph. I dont agree with rape and i dont think i said i do anywhere.

Quote:

---

Wrong, just plain wrong. It is the first responsibility of a people to protect their society. And the first responsibility of a society to protect it's people. A society that fails to protect it's members, especially those that cannot protect themselves, has failed in the only thing it's truly meant for.

---

Uhhh....i dont see how that relates to what you quoted. I do not feel i have any responsibility to protect society necessarily you know? Just like the other guy seeing you being beaten up, he doesnt have to help you. It would be nice if he did but if he doesnt then he doesnt. Society doesnt protect its members too, in some cases it hurts some of those that cant defend themselves. Maybe its first responsibility for you but not for everyone out there.

I think its fine for him to have an opinion too, just he came off as especially offensive and rude many times and i just havent said much about it. Again i am talking about a pedophile, not a child molestor, and i think thats where we got misunderstood. Most people think of pedophiles as child molestors and rapists right off the bat, while i do not and just think of them as people that have a fetish for children.

Quote:

---

Actually, the fact that you refuse to even accept the evidence that you're wrong. Child molesters (and all child-adult sexual activity is molestation) DESTROY lives. As thoroughly as if they shot them.... more thoroughly, actually... the survival rates (lifespan) for gunshot victims are actually MUCH higher than that of child molestation victims. Bullets either kill or wound, wounds that heal. Molestation creates injuries that are less obvious, but just as horrific, and infinitely harder to treat.

---

Again i agree with you about child molestors and rapists. What i am saying is a pedophile, NOT a molestor or rapist. A pedophile does not immediate mean they are one of those.

Just curious can i see some information about rape vs gunshot wounds? I am just curious :3

Quote:

---

Actually, wrong again. I do believe that the person who started this thread asked for opinions and responces. General call, meaning, he has as much right as you do. Really, moreso, because he's being far more civil. And, for that matter, sane. Oh, and he doesn't have to reply to you, I think I did a good job. He's right-wing, and I'm about as far "left" as they go (or, does "Goddess-worshipping, bisexual, happily promiscuous intellectual" not go far enough to qualify me)... and, somehow, we are both unified in our belief that the wellbeing of the children is more important that some weak-willed scumbag's need to get laid.

---

Actually he was the one that put the "dont post here you dont even have to reply" bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Don't answer that, in fact there's no need for you to reply to me, just as there was no need for you to reply in the first place.

---

I fail to see how that is civil, and the only reason i said that was to let him know, is that really a civil way of talking?

I also agree with you that protecting children is good, maybe it got lost somewhere but i agree with that. Its just you guys put every single pedophile under the assumption they are molestors and rapists. That is untrue and that we should accept that there are people like that but arent molestors and rapists. Maybe i was being unclear and i apologize for that but thats the point i was trying to make.

Think i am insane all you want :P I am pretty liberal too.

EDIT!:

Quote:

---

If you're the type of person to say "oh, whatever somebody wants to do, it's their decision", then you go ahead and keep thinking that, but it's that same type of thinking that has and will further cause the downfall of our society, and we'll end up just like Soddom and Ghomorrah.

My point with the dog was to say that if you think it's natural and normal for people to want sex with anything simply because animals do it too, then it would mean that it's "normal" for people to hump the side of the couch, or their cat.

---

I will keep thinking that way, the guy next to you has every right to shoot you if he wants to, he just has to face the consequences. If you think it will cause the downfall of society, go ahead. I dont care, i think its a perfectly fine way to think, everyone has every right to do something, but they just have to face the consequences.

Normal is also subjective, its normal for us to use cars, but in another society its not. So what is normal to you isnt normal to everyone else. If something is done that is not normal to you does that mean that it isnt done? Is it any less valid? Normal is just not justifyable to me, the act is just is, its up to us to decide if its normal or not.

In any case i aint going to flame as subtlely as you like in some of your paragraphs, because you really are flaming a few people. I wont go to deep into it and i will ignore that from now on because i just see it too often in your posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omecle

Hell, it's just a 4 year gap, nothing out of the ordinary, really.

---

Yes and no... When we get to be older, it would be perfectly fine--a 30-year-old being in a relationship with a 35- or a 25-year-old wouldn't be bad. But when it comes to an eight year old, it doesn't matter if the other person is 16 or 60, it ain't right. An 18-year-old having a sexual ("consensual") relationship with a 14-year-old is definitely not right, in my opinion, but, granted, not as bad as anybody in a sexual relationship with a younger child. There are 14-year-olds that know what sex is and think they're ready for it--they're wrong--and unfortunately there are plenty of older sickos that would help those young teenagers fulfill their sexual fantasies, but there's a difference in those young teens and even younger children.

Yeah, well, we established that distinction. Pedophile: sexually desires children. Child molester: carries out that desire and (in some form) initiates sexual contact with a child. Pedophile: sick, need to be treated and (if not cured) at least controlled. Child molester: moster, should die at the hands of the victem and/or his/her family.

Pretty fair distinction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omecle

Hell, it's just a 4 year gap, nothing out of the ordinary, really.

---

Yes and no... When we get to be older, it would be perfectly fine--a 30-year-old being in a relationship with a 35- or a 25-year-old wouldn't be bad. But when it comes to an eight year old, it doesn't matter if the other person is 16 or 60, it ain't right. An 18-year-old having a sexual ("consensual") relationship with a 14-year-old is definitely not right, in my opinion, but, granted, not as bad as anybody in a sexual relationship with a younger child. There are 14-year-olds that know what sex is and think they're ready for it--they're wrong--and unfortunately there are plenty of older sickos that would help those young teenagers fulfill their sexual fantasies, but there's a difference in those young teens and even younger children.

---

Firstly, I didn't say anything about an 8 year old. I do point out there is a difference in teenagers and children too. A 14 year old will know what it means to have 'some' kind of relationship, just as an 18 year old would. The 18 year old might have an easier time seducing and manipulating the 14 year old though. But there are cases where the 18 year old goes out with the 14 year old not for sex, just for a relationship. >.>; As I said, not everything is about sex.

I'm not saying I would ever go out with someone so young (I'm 18 myself, with a girlfriend who is 6 months older than me). I wouldn't even jump out of the 2 year gap. But that doesn't mean I can't accept another 'real' relationship like I've mentioned up above.

(note: I'm not talking abotu children (who I classify to be younger than 13) and Im just talking about 14-15 year olds and up right now)

I dont feel pedophiles are necessarily sick is all. I think somehow somewhere you got the impression that i was talking about a molestor or rapist and i think its fine kinda idea. Which is wrong because i do not support them, they can do that but i sure as hell wouldnt like it...

Just want to clear that up, i think we got misconception here.

I dont think its as clear cut as an age cut and all of a sudden that person is not understanding of things, some people know more at a different age. I think age shouldnt matter if handled properly (especially the younger they are).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

I think age shouldnt matter if handled properly (especially the younger they are).

---

Yeah, well, at 13 or below, "handled properly" is synonymous with "doesn't happen in the first place".

Also, just to note, sexual relationships between two children within the 11-14 range have a tendancy to cause emotional trauma. Arguably blameless, but still very real, damage. It gets progressively worse as the other participant gets older (at least until adulthood).

Quote:

---

Yeah, well, at 13 or below, "handled properly" is synonymous with "doesn't happen in the first place".

---

I would just say less likely to happen than to put forth a definitive statement...thats all the difference in opinion is however.

Yeah tendency maybe, but not when the person does not want the 14 yr old to be hurt, and actually cares for him. The person is not out just for sex, and relationships should not be focused on sex anyway.

Quote:

---

On top of all that, your sig translates to "little hampsters, big adventures", a quite obvious reference to the homosexual act of placing a hampster, gerbil, et cetera into one's rectum to feel it squirm around.

---

Where the smeg did that come from?! :lol: my sig refers to an Anime I watch (And have done Since I was 5) where one of the character's personalty was modled on Michael Jackson. (Hense why he's on the picture and "Jacko" has been writen in place of the Character's name - "Hamtaro")

The simple fact is, a 14-year-old is still a child, and not fully matured in any sense. They don't know what they should and shouldn't be getting into, and they're easy to influence. We're all been fourteen years old before...some of us still are, it seems. A child of fourteen is not ready for a sexual relationship, period. And a non-sexual relationship between an older person and a 14-year-old wouldn't be considered paedophilia, would it?

And dude, "peqeños hamsters, grandes aventuras" translates to "small hampsters, big adventures". Included with a picture and reference to Michael Jackson, if that ain't a reference to felching, I don't know what is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

And a non-sexual relationship between an older person and a 14-year-old wouldn't be considered paedophilia, would it?

---

Pedophilia doesn't require sex. Not even sexualities require sex, really.

And when did you start using the British spelling?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kawaii Ryûkishi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

And a non-sexual relationship between an older person and a 14-year-old wouldn't be considered paedophilia, would it?

---

Pedophilia doesn't require sex. Not even sexualities require sex, really.

And when did you start using the British spelling?

---

That was my point.

And...I...don't know. I really have no idea. That's a good question. I looked back to my first post in this thread, and I have it spelled like that there, too...hellifino, I'm just weird.

What about when you take into account that many 14 year olds look more adult like than child like. Plenty of 14 year old girls can and do get into over 18 bars.

more politely phrased summary by eest: I generally disagree with your statements, lionx. Pedophiles deserve to be in jail. I know people who committed suicide because they were molested as children.

One in twelve molestation victems will commit suicide. The risk of them abusing drugs goes up to 50/50. The risk of them abusing *heavy* drugs like cocaine, speed, heroin and crack goes up to 1 in 4. With the standard O.D. rates.

And there are thousands who suffer silently, that we will never know of... not to mention those that the molesters kill right after the rape, to shut them up the most effective way.

Yes sex is part of a relationship, its up to the people in the relationship to make it how huge. Pedophilla doesnt require sex, and despite what you think i have upmost confidence that it will be fine between the 18 and 14 year old. Not everyone is a sick bastard, some people actually want a real relationship, and since you arent even in the relationship how do you know? Give them a chance and you shall see.

Sat: Right molesters, not every pedo out there is a molestor, just like how that guy next to you might be into a fetish you arent in, but arent a molestor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

One in twelve molestation victems will commit suicide. The risk of them abusing drugs goes up to 50/50. The risk of them abusing *heavy* drugs like cocaine, speed, heroin and crack goes up to 1 in 4. With the standard O.D. rates.

And there are thousands who suffer silently, that we will never know of... not to mention those that the molesters kill right after the rape, to shut them up the most effective way.

---

(Since these statistics were asked for...) I didn't know this, but I did know that typical gunshot wounds have a 3% fatality rate. Much lower than one in twelve. Of course, that's also not including unintentional drug overdoses, as you mentioned. One in twelve...that's sad.

Destai, I don't think I've ever seen a 14-year-old that I could confuse for an adult. I looked much older than I was, especially when I didn't shave (hell, when I was 15 some schmuck kid asked me to buy chew for him, and when I was 17 some moron asked me to buy beer), but I don't think I could have passed for 18 when I was 14. And even so, it's not like a relationship can get started and love grow to that much of a bond before somebody figures out how old their partner is, usually that's something that comes up in the first conversation. A 14-year-old possibly looking like she's 18 doesn't make anything any better. (By the way, underage girls can get into bars because they're ladies, did you never realize that? If the same girl tried to buy cigarettes, unless the guy at the counter was hitting on her, she'd be carded.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

Yes sex is part of a relationship, its up to the people in the relationship to make it how huge. Pedophilla doesnt require sex, and despite what you think i have upmost confidence that it will be fine between the 18 and 14 year old. Not everyone is a sick bastard, some people actually want a real relationship, and since you arent even in the relationship how do you know? Give them a chance and you shall see.

Sat: Right molesters, not every pedo out there is a molestor, just like how that guy next to you might be into a fetish you arent in, but arent a molestor.

---

Also, i think its worth noting that, the age thing for relationships is fairly new. only like within the last 150years has it really changed. In old times, it was pefectly normal for a girl who was 14 to be getting ready to be married to a much older man. 18 and 14 isnt really a big difference in age. granted, i didnt really read the post before this one so idont know what was say about this age thing, but i just want to say that its not really that big of a deal. I mean, its just like being a senior in highschool and your talking to a freshman. not that big of a deal. I wouldnt have a relationship with no girl that young, but i dont think i would think to much about it if i saw someone else doing it.


[q=Sasquatch]
A 14-year-old possibly looking like she's 18 doesn't make anything any better. (By the way, underage girls can get into bars because they're ladies, did you never realize that? If the same girl tried to buy cigarettes, unless the guy at the counter was hitting on her, she'd be carded.)[/q]

Yeah, this is true. Girls that are underage usually only get into the club because they look good. Sometimes, they arent really fooling anybody but themselves. I dont know though man, when i was 15/16 i was buying my own beer without being carded. I guess i mustve looked a little older than i really am. Like, i tell people at work that im only 19 and they dont believe me. Somone accually thought i was in my late 20's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

Give them a chance and you shall see.

---

I've been reading this thread a lot lately, and this is what I see wrong with your argument. You have your head up in the clouds saying "Some people just like children, but their intentions are pure! Give them a chance and you'll see!" This belief is naive at best. Have you considered the risk of said chance? What if they're motivated solely by their carnal desires, and would do anything to satisfy them? Most parents wouldn't be willing to take that risk with their children just to see if a pedophile has pure intentions.

Sexual relations between an 18-year-old and a 14-year-old is different, though, so I see where you're coming from. It's difficult to draw the line sometimes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AkiraMakie

Also, i think its worth noting that, the age thing for relationships is fairly new. only like within the last 150years has it really changed. In old times, it was pefectly normal for a girl who was 14 to be getting ready to be married to a much older man. 18 and 14 isnt really a big difference in age.

---

Good point. However, 150 years ago, it was acceptable to smack your wife around when she wasn't doing what you told her, too, and a "divorce" was unheard of. Definitely, though, in the past, ladies were able to get married in their early teens.

ok..mostly of my statements were sensored:( so this will be short.....pedos should be shot or at least be in jail for life. and since my comments got sensored it ruined my point..i think i cursed to much or something. and to those who accept pedos....u should get help too

Doc:

How is it naive? Its the same concept of how some people think all gay or bisexual people are all for the sex and not for the relationship. But you know that is not true.

I considered the risks, but the point is that when i talk about the said chance, the assumption that carnal desires are not the primary concern and it is the relationship. If you are going to put carnal desires there then its no different than some person that is having casual sex out there. I am going for the relationship...not the sex itself only, because other than that its casual sex and its not applicable because i am not talking about that.

Plus what you described is just the molestor and/or the casual sex person. I am not talking about those people, i am talking about people who actually want a relationship but have pedophilla. Parents dont even like some kids dating at a younger age, but that doesnt stop some kids anyway.

I dont think there ever will be a clear cut line IMO, its up to the individual people to decide unless some law is passed..which i hope never will.

Sat: Maybe if you ever get a fetish that isnt widely accepted or is considered taboo you should get shot too >_>

Please, Lionx, for the love of whatever it is that you hold sacred, don't have children. Any decent parent... would make damn sure to keep their children away from that kind of sick scum. Look, I don't care about other sexual fetishes, sex is sex, and as long as it hurts no one, I'll let it go. I'd usually prefer they stay far away from me, but, whatever.

But even a "romantic relationship" (saying that makes me sick in this situation) that is WITHOUT sex is hell on a child. You don't get it, the sex isn't the cause of most of the problems, the exploitation (and I don't care what's going through the mind of the Pedo, what the intention is, he or she is STILL exploiting the child) does the most grievous harm. It's sick, and it devestates the child's life, and it usually makes it so they can't develop healthy relationships of their own.

You've never seen what it does, Lionx, I have. I've seen it as closely as one can without actually experiencing it personally. I've talk to the victims, I've even talked with the pedophiles themselves. I can't help but cry when I think about it. Whether in sorrow, or in rage, I don't know... some kind of confused mix, I think. But the tears are no less real for it.

There is no middle ground, there can BE no middle ground. And you are naive to think that those people wouldn't try to engage the subject sexually!?! Most of them are sick enough to believe they're actually "in love" with their victims. And they're sick enough to try and consumate their "love"... then again, to be honest, I like consumating my love as well... but I have a consenting, adult, partner.

Oh, and so you don't have any illusions about "love"... pedophiles that end up in a long-running "relationship" with their victim, lose interest entirely when the child developes too far into adulthood. It isn't love the pedophile seeks, it's lust and control... otherwise, they'd seek their feelings in a more equivilant partner.

Those few pedophiles who actually fight their condition, those are the ones with the real love, those are the ones who care enough not to destroy the children they lust after.

Like I said, there can be no middle ground, no compromise, not on this issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Destai, I don't think I've ever seen a 14-year-old that I could confuse for an adult. I looked much older than I was, especially when I didn't shave (hell, when I was 15 some schmuck kid asked me to buy chew for him, and when I was 17 some moron asked me to buy beer), but I don't think I could have passed for 18 when I was 14. And even so, it's not like a relationship can get started and love grow to that much of a bond before somebody figures out how old their partner is, usually that's something that comes up in the first conversation. A 14-year-old possibly looking like she's 18 doesn't make anything any better. (By the way, underage girls can get into bars because they're ladies, did you never realize that? If the same girl tried to buy cigarettes, unless the guy at the counter was hitting on her, she'd be carded.)

---

Well thats the thing, you probably have. Im speaking more about tennage girls, Its alot easier for them to make a 14 year old girl look 18 than a boy at that age. From the age of 13 and up ,I dont consider it peadophilia. Just inapropriate in a way that isnt that of a peadophile.

Quote:

---

ok..mostly of my statements were sensored so this will be short.....pedos should be shot or at least be in jail for life. and since my comments got sensored it ruined my point..i think i cursed to much or something. and to those who accept pedos....u should get help too

---

Why exactly should they be shot? They havent done anything wrong. If you were to learn the difference between a peadophile (someone who finds children attractive) and a child molester (someone who molests children) and were to replace one word with the other in your posts then yes, Id see where you're coming from but jailing or killing someone for thinking a certain way is ridiculous and if that seems logical to you then you're a nutjob or an immature little kid.

Quote:

---

How is it naive? Its the same concept of how some people think all gay or bisexual people are all for the sex and not for the relationship. But you know that is not true.

---

That makes sense to me but a child will never be mature enough to have a relationship with an adult. Theyre brains and body arent developed or matured enough to take part in a relationship and any adult that would still have a relationship with a child is a manipulator.

I dont think most people are sick, just different is all. I can have children if i want to, and i certainetly would be wary of someone looking at my child like that. Because as i said more often than not it does result in harm, i just think there is a chance that not all of it could be despite what we see.

Its not self-fish and unethical if the child is consenting, while i do understand that the child might not understand any of this that doesnt mean that every child might be like that. Its possible but just not likely IMO. But it also depends how old, i mean someone 13 might be fine i would think(over 13 is mostly where i consider them smart enough to a degree). Children are not always vulnerable anyway, alot of them are very underhanded especially once they reach the 4th grade.

I am sorry that most people you talked to are hurt that way, however saying that they are uncontrollable raging hormone monsters is just wrong. They are people too. Some might not have control(maybe alot) but some might.

Plus how do you know when you are in love anyway? If they are "sick" enough to believe they are in love does that mean that you are sick as well for loving a guy as the current prejudice goes. I think its rare that it will end up working but it could, doesnt mean it would but it could even though its low chance.

Equivalent can mean many things, some think homosexual relationships arent equivalent. While i do agree that they might lose interest later i dont think the love should diminish else you can say you wont love your wife because she is sexy now but not later when she gets older. How do you know its ALWAYS lust and control? Are you one of them? Maybe some said that but i really dont think it can be an always case.

I believe there could be, although as rare as it can be, maybe i am too idealistic and trying to understand the other side that could be good as well. But i still think of them as people whereas some of you think they arent and i dont think someone that is a pedophile, just because he is one makes him any less of a person.

Destai: Maybe..but not necessarily an manipulator i guess. I can see where it can go but it doesnt necessarily have to be manipulative, at least, if i somehow was to be the person i wouldnt. Unless you count just starting the relationship to be manipulative. If you really like the person you can wait for them to reach an older age if you really liked even before any real relationship goes and that wouldnt be manipulative would it?'

My view is that, i dont think every pedophile out there is a monster like some of you people label them as.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omecle

Why does everything have to be about sex?

Yes, if someone was using another for sex, it's wrong. Expecialy when it's rape. An 18 year old can actualy have a relationship with a 14 year old, without sex. I'm absolutely possitive they can. Not everything is about sex. But I agree that rape (in any cirtcumstances) and using / molesting a child is wrong.

Hell, it's just a 4 year gap, nothing out of the ordinary, really.

---

But the maturity levels between the two, more likely than not, are not at the same level, and a relationship probably wouldn't end up working. I ended up having to learn this the hard way, when I wanted to pursue a relationship with a 13 year old.

Yeah its true that they might not be, but the 14 yr old has been in relationships too and he does seem alot more mature than alot of other 13-15 year olds out there. He even talked about the future that they are going to work out on and differences and the sort. I dont believe theres many like that out there though which is why i feel in this case its more the exception than the norm...but just goes to show its not impossible for a larger age gap(in which most people csonsider to be..2? is it?).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Destai

Well thats the thing, you probably have. Im speaking more about tennage girls, Its alot easier for them to make a 14 year old girl look 18 than a boy at that age. From the age of 13 and up ,I dont consider it peadophilia. Just inapropriate in a way that isnt that of a peadophile.

---

A relationship that's between people of those two ages isn't bad if it isn't sexual. People just shouldn't be having sex at 14. I'm not even saying it as an adult, I am 14, and I know I'd never have sex at my age. Even 16 is a bit too young, in my opinion. The reason people are mostly against those types of relationships is that the older person may be wanting more or the younger person may not be the most mature at that age, though that is not always the case.

Paedophilia for me is sex or any other type of relationship that's above a brother-sister/parent-offspring/aunt-niece/etc between a person who's of age or at least close to it (15+ I guess?) and someone who hasn't hit puberty. Like a 15+ year old person and 5 year old. Sex between an 18 year old and a teen is just not a good idea.

Quote:

---

Its not self-fish and unethical if the child is consenting, while i do understand that the child might not understand any of this that doesnt mean that every child might be like that. Its possible but just not likely IMO. But it also depends how old, i mean someone 13 might be fine i would think(over 13 is mostly where i consider them smart enough to a degree). Children are not always vulnerable anyway, alot of them are very underhanded especially once they reach the 4th grade.

---

A child is someone who has not hit puberty yet. Essentially, that's about 11 years and younger. An 8 year old is not going to be consenting, truly. They might say yes, and they MIGHT even have some idea, but they won't know what's going on, how it's going to affect them later in life. It's just not right.

Well it doesnt have to be sex, i mean it can be a nuturing relationship maybe...although i doubt most of the people out there to do something like that. Kids date at any age(not necessarily to our liking too), although the only difference here is someone is older. If we put sex out of the equation here(which i have...dont know about other people), would everyone still be opposed to this..? I am curious about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

Well it doesnt have to be sex, i mean it can be a nuturing relationship maybe...although i doubt most of the people out there to do something like that. Kids date at any age(not necessarily to our liking too), although the only difference here is someone is older. If we put sex out of the equation here(which i have...dont know about other people), would everyone still be opposed to this..? I am curious about that.

---

But a nuturing relationship isn't paedophilia. I can see a child and love it in a way where I hope it'll live happy and be healthy, like a sibling. But that's not me thinking I'm IN LOVE with it, that's me caring about it.

And also, kids don't usually date until they hit puberty, unless it's "MAYBE kiss on the cheek, let's go to Chuckie Cheese and bowl" crush. I know I had crushes when I was around 9, but it was like an infatuation thing where I just wanted play video games with the kid (same age) and maybe go to a pizzeria, nothing more.

Why cant it be nurturing like other relationships if both people make it to be? The relationship can also start out like what you described and maybe it could lead up more during an older age. You are assuming it to be bad in the first place =/

I just think its rare but not entirely impossible. If the entire reason is that the person is not mature enough just start a friend relationship and ask later on during their lives, its not impossible and whos to say a kid is necessarily immature just by looking at age alone?

I love my niece. She's almost three and a half years old. I'll always love her, and I love holding her and playing with her. That's a nurturing relationship. No romance. No intamacy. No sexual contact of any kind. No desire for it at all. That's not paedophilia, that's the "nurturing relationship" you mentioned. Parents have a "nurturing relationship" with their children, that doesn't mean they're paedophiles.

Kids aren't mature. They may think they are, but they're not. I'm sure most of us thought we were mature when we were young, but we weren't. Hell, I was very mature for my age when I was younger, but "very mature" for a 14-year-old doesn't come anywhere close to "mature" for an adult. Paedophiles know this, and they feed off of it--one of the reasons a child may think they're "mature" is that they may be able to carry on a relationship with an older partner. The older partner is using this thought of the child's "maturity", and the younger partner is happy because they look and feel more "mature".

As for your "Maybe if you ever get a fetish that isnt widely accepted or is considered taboo you should get shot too" comment, I agree. If I ever were to start molesting children, somebody should blow my damn head off. If I ever start having sex with animals, castrate me, quickly, before I breed with a human, or at least beat the hell out of me.

A nurturing relationship doesnt have to fall between your definition to be nurturing.

If you think that just becuase you are older than someone you will take advantage of the older then you have a really wrong sense of idea here. There is no intent of that and alot of you are assuming that is the case but it isnt and not always necessarily the case for the relationship i described with the 14 and 18 year old. They both know full well of the differences involved.

Dont worry i prolly shoot you before you do anything close to that. >_> Heard of sarcasm? I highly disagree with people like you that would likely want to kill another just becuase they are different. ITs kinda sickening in which i dont really like posting on this forum in the first place because of that(granted you think i am pretty sick too, and you dont feel you are sick..it goes both ways). Please tell everyone out there that has a fetish that because they have one that doesnt agree with you to die. Molestors i can sorta understand even though the killing part is already something i cannot ever stand for even if they did that. I just find its people like that, that just do not accept others becuase they are different and they dont agree with them. No wonder we have homosexual people out there dead and abused with this kind of thought and other stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

As for your "Maybe if you ever get a fetish that isnt widely accepted or is considered taboo you should get shot too" comment, I agree. If I ever were to start molesting children, somebody should blow my damn head off. If I ever start having sex with animals, castrate me, quickly, before I breed with a human, or at least beat the hell out of me.

---

Im pretty sure this is what you meant but theres nothing wrong with having a fetish as long as you dont actually carry it out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

My view is that, i dont think every pedophile out there is a monster like some of you people label them as.

---

I have everything against pedophiles who seek to satisfy their desires. They go from being unfortunate and pitiable, to being monsters worthy of nothing, not even a quick death, at exactly that moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

My view is that, i dont think every pedophile out there is a monster like some of you people label them as.

---

I have everything against pedophiles who seek to satisfy their desires. They go from being unfortunate and pitiable, to being monsters worthy of nothing, not even a quick death, at exactly that moment.

---

What i am trying to say is that not every pedophile out there is going to self-fishly satisfy their desires out there like you label them as.

Dude, if you remember, I've pointed out the difference between pedophile and child molester at least three times. I'm pretty sure I was the first person to do so on this thread. Pay attention, jeez...

She didnt say anything about child molestors in that post you quoted Udsuna. She said peadophiles.

Yes you did, but it always seems as if people cant distingush the two of them, and the way you worded it just seemed to target them in general is all. =/ Bah.

I am getting tire of people saying ALL children can't understand stuff that we currently believe they can't.

I learned Algebra when I was about 8 years old. And I do mean algebra... the algebra I learned then was much of the same stuff that we were taught in the end of 8th grade and early Algebra 1.

And it wasn't only me, our teacher had taken a whole group of us and taught us algebra.. though I was the youngest and the smallest. Anyways we who were in that group are the top of the class grade and intellect wise. We also, while being highly playful, tend to be more mature and reasonable then the others.

Anyways basically saying someone can't understand concepts at a younger age is silly, imo. Generalizations are oftentimes not correct in all cases. This goes for age and racial generalizations, not to mention all the other kinds.

Except that it's true. Seriously, every person I've ever known, after becoming an adult, has experienced a relevatory "Wow, I was a dumbass when I was a teenager" epiphany.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShunNakamura

I learned Algebra when I was about 8 years old. And I do mean algebra... the algebra I learned then was much of the same stuff that we were taught in the end of 8th grade and early Algebra 1.

And it wasn't only me, our teacher had taken a whole group of us and taught us algebra.. though I was the youngest and the smallest. Anyways we who were in that group are the top of the class grade and intellect wise. We also, while being highly playful, tend to be more mature and reasonable then the others.

---

Intellectual capacity does not equal wisdom. For instance, I think it's a safe bet that I knew more about quantum physics at 13 than most adults do, but that doesn't mean I could have possibly handled a sexual relationship. In fact, I would argue (now) that I was remarkably unfit for one.

My own thoughts on the subject are that pedophiles, in and of themselves, don't bother me - like was said much earlier in this thread,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necronopticous

There is a big difference between a pedophile and a child molestor, if every guy out there watching lolicon anime was molesting children, and if every guy watching tentacle hentai was raping women there would be a hell of a lot more crime than there actually is. The main thing is whether or not the person acts on whatever their bizzare fantasy might be.

---

However, the moment someone even seriously considers having any kind of sexual contact with a child (and I would argue that that would include anyone 17 and under, for those that are over 20) is a child molestor. And what to do with them... well, I'm sometimes curious as to why we don't have the death penalty for rape, considering how much damage it does to the victim.

I don't believe it's an illness; it's just another sexual preference, like heterosexuality, or homosexuality. The problem is children cannot consent to sex, and pedophiles force children to do these things with them. And of course it's a problem.. o_o

More like a fetish than a sexual preference as far as I can see. Ill probably change that opinion. I know thinking baout the topic last night I realized a way in which it was similar to homosexuality and heterosexuality but now I find Ive forgotten again.

It's not a sexual fetish.

fetish c : an object or bodily part whose real or fantasied presence is psychologically necessary for sexual gratification and that is an object of fixation to the extent that it may interfere with complete sexual expression

sexual preference/orientation 2 : a usually general or lasting direction of thought, inclination, or interest

Just like you prefer the opposite sex, some prefer the same sex, others prefer... children... :sweatdrop

As i said, the only real problem we have of this is that, more often than not, it hurts the child in the process no matter what intentions the older person might have if they had sex with the kid. I would say that molestors and rapists DO fit into the fetish category where they rampantly hurt kids like that just to satisfy their desires. The pedophiles that however do not do such things(however rare there are unfortunetly) i would say fits into the orientation definition more if it was to go by that meaning.

Kinda like...Casual Sex and/or Rape vs Long Lasting relationship...although that might not be the best of analogies...sorry its like 4AM @_@.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lionx

And you can call any of them "defects" if you so desire, but they're certainly NOT genetic. Identical twins won't necessarily end up with the same sexual identities. Hence, something else... what, I cannot say, but not genes.

---

I read in a scientific magazine that a guy with a younger brother is more likely to be homosexual, because after the first pregnancy, a genetic "switch" is likely to be turned off, resulting in the next guy being gay. Hence the reason I said it was a genetic thing.

I wasn't trying to imply that all homosexuals are freaks of nature. Sorry if anyone took offense to my earlier post.

ERrrr..i dont remember saying that...you sure its from me?

Yeah i guess i can see where you are comming from, but i have had alot of people say they are genetic failures or whatever..and thats just...wrong somehow =/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UltimaLimit

I read in a scientific magazine that a guy with a younger brother is more likely to be homosexual, because after the first pregnancy, a genetic "switch" is likely to be turned off, resulting in the next guy being gay. Hence the reason I said it was a genetic thing.

I wasn't trying to imply that all homosexuals are freaks of nature. Sorry if anyone took offense to my earlier post.

---

I don't know where you heard that, how outdated it was, or if you mis-understood the materials, but that is PAINFULLY innacurate. There are no genetic markers that turn on/off based upon the order of birth. There CANNOT be any genetic markers in the child that do it, that much is basic biology. And any genetic switches in the mother shouldn't have an influence of the biology of a child.

I can't tell you WHAT causes homosexuality, no ethical scientist could. We have many theories (also known as guessing), but no facts support any particular theory well enough to know for certain. I've mentioned it before, but there are many cases of genetically identical twins with differing sexualities. So, presumably, DNA has nothing to do with sexual identity. Or, perhaps, no more than how some people are more genetically prone to some types of cancer than others.

Of course, admittedly, some psychological traumas CAN cause sexual disfuctions that mimic sexual identities. But there are relatively identifiable signs.

I have to admit that I am not completely objective about this whole subject, because I am well aware that having met my boyfriend at the age of 14, I (who was 17 at that time) might myself be guilty of paedophilia in the eyes of some people.

Personally, I never felt like I was doing something wrong. Can't say I ever had an interest in 'young kids' or the likes either. To me he seemed more mature then me, and I didn't find out about his age later. Back on topic however.

For me the most difficult issue with this is what would exactly be defined as a paedophile, and exactly when you can say for sure the child is too immature to make their own decisions. I guess paedophilia is largely defined by the 'child’s' maturity in a possible (non sexual) relationship. I do agree that an eight-year-old can't possibly at that time think about the consequences of dating a, let's say, eighteen-year-old person. However, I do believe that when people reach puberty (13, 14 years old) they become more aware of what relationships mean.

Let me sketch out a stereo-typical example here. A friend of mine lost her virginity when she was just 13 years old, to a guy who was 18 at that time. She was pretty mature for her age I should add, and frequently went to bars with a faked ID (around here, The Netherlands, there are some bars that allow people to enter at 16, which is the legal drinking age for most alcoholic drinks). She didn't mind it happening either >> ; She didn't look her age at all, and I can understand if the guy thought she was 16. Would he be considered a paedophile?

Off course, rape is wrong in many ways, and in my eyes the worst thing that can happen to anyone. However, I'm against the dead penalty suggested by some here (well, they suggested it in some ways anyway). Anger and rage are understandable, and being the hypocrite that I am I must admit that I too would be very temped to bash skulls if someone touched my siblings in a way like that.. However, who are we to decide whether someone should die or not? In my opinion it makes us no better then the one committing the crimes. Medical castration is a better option in my opinion, resulting in being taken into custody when not taking the medications.

However, everybody should be offered an opportunity to prove themselves. Like pointed out before, when someone is a paedophile doesn't mean he sleeps with / rapes kids. These people have different sexual preferences then the majority of the crowd, and I guess in that way you CAN compare them to homophiles or bisexual people. Because a majority of the people is hetro, but that doesn't mean everybody else is.

It might be a smart action however to ask people that are paedophiles (I'm talking about all now, not just the ones committing rape) to not work at/around kindergartens / elementary schools / day-care centres and the likes, to avoid 'temptation' sort to say.