Paedophilia a 'sexual orientation - like being straight or gay'

[qazwsxedc34]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/p...al-psychologist-child-sex-abuse-a6965956.html

I'm starting to believe in my distorted peanut of a brain that the media has begun to embrace pedophilia. It should be obvious that attempting to find explanations concerning the warped thoughts of a pedophile require one to accept and understand the illness. It seems like our society breeds reprisal for wrongdoing. Personally, in order to treat a mental illness effectively and believe me I like them young too, one must look back at past events and the environment in which they were brought up in. Is it any wonder why most abused children become addicts (food, sex, drugs and/or alcohol) are abusive to their own bodies? Many are unable to bond and trust with others and often have serious mental challenges and a lack of coping skills. If we can understand and except the past circumstances we might be more open as a society to treat mental illness more effectively. It should be clear to anyone that a desire to have sex with a small, helpless, vulnerable child, not one specific one, just a child, any child is clearly an illness, not an orientation. Maybe, freedom US of A will legalize child molestation. There are plenty of YouTube videos that have been promoted pushing the pedophilia is a orientation and consent is the handicap. Should Pedophilia be legalized if children give consent to sexual relationship? We can only hope! Pain is gain, good to go!

 

[NewEscuelers]

Get out your umbrellas everyone, there's a shitstorm on the horizon

 

[Rennis_Deynolds]

[img=]http://www.lawschoolblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Nexus-spring-blog-image-Rabble.jpg[/img]

 

[iFlip]

 

[Ranch]

 

[snowpocalypse]

nope, nope and nope. People can claim anything they want but that doesn't make it true. I'm sure there are paedo's out there that would love to normalize their behavior and I'm sure they are mentally ill but that means nothing to the victims whom's lives they ruin. They can not be treated, they can not be released back into society and they can not be rehabilitated. The only way to treat pedophilia is a needle in the arm.

 

[Laurent.]

Terminology is key here.

Pedophilia is not an illness.

In discussing Pedophilia, DSM-5 makes reference to the term Pedophilic Sexual Orientation.

Sexual Orientation is ordinarily used to designate the category, or categories, of persons whom a given individual finds to be sexually appealing.

Those who are heterosexually oriented are sexually attracted to adults of the opposite sex; those who are homosexual, to adults of the same sex; men with a heterosexual pedophilic orientation, to prepubescent females; and men with a homosexual pedophilic orientation, to prepubescent boys.

Furthermore DSM-5 states that an indicator of a Pedophilic Disorder would be that an individual has “acted on” his sexual urges (Ref. 1, p 697). “Acted on” could mean that he has actually molested a child. On the other hand, it could also mean that he has masturbated to pedophilic fantasies or that he has viewed child pornography.

Pedophiles can't help being pedophiles. But they can choose not to act on their urges.

 

[onenerdykid]

Pedophiles can't help being pedophiles. But they can choose not to act on their urges.

This is key. Being able to suppress an urge or desire is party what makes us human. We are able to do otherwise, other animals not so much. I can't (truly & justifiably) get mad at my dog when it doesn't behave properly- it can't really act contrary to its nature. Sure I can train it a bit, but no matter how hard I try to train it, it will never stop eating grass or eating shit when I take it for walks (Austrian farmland, there's lots of both). My dog has an urge and it acts on that urge, it doesn't deliberate about what it ought to do. We, on the other hand, are capable of deliberation and choosing what we ought to do. And this is ultimately what will make us either good or bad people.

We are not perfect beings who automatically feel the right thing all the time- we will have feelings that are weird, inexplicable, and sometimes wrong. Ultimately, it's hard to blame another person for simply having a feeling or a desire because we don't choose our feelings & desires. We just feel them. We do, however, blame someone for how they act on that feeling/desire because that involves a choice, something within their control.

 

[.Hugo.]

All pedos should get a shot to each knee before a gut shot so they can die a slow painful death

 

[ronders_]

Get out your umbrellas everyone, there's a shitstorm on the horizon

"Oh you'll know Bubs, when the old shit barometer rises, and you'll feel it too."

 

[JayAppleJunior]

this is funny

 

[cobra_commander]

It's only a matter of time. The social progressive movement doesn't have any actual disired end state, they just want to keep 'progressing.' First it was homosexuality, and really, that was fine. Some conservatives asked if homosexuality is ok, what is next. They were ignored because that question is silly. Two adults, making adult decisions. Then it was transgender tolerance, and sure, we can go along with that. Your're an adult. go ahead and cross dress and pretend you're something you're not. We might even redefine gender to make it whatever is less likely to hurt feelings. Then (and now) it was time to turn to transgender acceptance, and now if you don't think a dude should be using the same bathroom as girls or vise versa you're a fucking bigot. If you're school doesn't make it ok, they can get their funding cut, regardless of what the local PTA thinks.

It's the dumb fucking progressive social movement. They just keep on going and needing to be progressive. So yes, pedophilia and beasteality are going to be accptable in the not so distant future, because they are people too. Or some progressive bullshit. The success of this movement has led to the rise of folks like Tiny Hands Trump.

So that silly question is no longer silly.

 

[PeppermillReno]

What a shock the pedo sympathizer posters like SJW stayed out of this thread because they think pedos deserve the same kind of rights as homos and trannys.

You just can't make it up with this type of fucking scum.

 

[S.J.W]

What a shock the pedo sympathizer posters like SJW stayed out of this thread because they think pedos deserve the same kind of rights as homos and trannys.

You just can't make it up with this type of fucking scum.

Nowhere has anyone stated that being a paedophile is okay and should be accepted. What the study instead has found is that paedophiles have a natural attraction to children. They can't help it. Which is true, and to be help these people and protect children from abuse is to understand why an offender commits a crime. This is criminology 101. I fail to see how stating that paedophilia is natural equates to saying it should be allowed. Children are vulnerable to coercion and are very persuasive. People also have a natural urge to commit arson and no one ever concluded from scholars finding that they meant that arson should be allowed. So why from a scholar saying that paedophilia is an orientation can you somehow find that it supports the idea that paedophilia should be normalized?

 

[Bogs]

So yes, pedophilia and beasteality are going to be accptable in the not so distant future, because they are people too. Or some progressive bullshit. The success of this movement has led to the rise of folks like Tiny Hands Trump.

So that silly question is no longer silly.

What a shock the pedo sympathizer posters like SJW stayed out of this thread because they think pedos deserve the same kind of rights as homos and trannys.

You just can't make it up with this type of fucking scum.

It's funny because, if you guys read/understood the article, you'd know that the writer explicitly states, several times, that acting on pedophilic impulses is not okay. The point of the article was to explain that pedophiles can't help their attraction to children, but that doesn't mean they have to act on it, but even pedophiles who have never acted on their impulses are still shunned as if they do. Part of the author's motivation for writing the article was to reach out to other people like him and let them know there is a whole community of people who feel urges towards kids but don't act on them, and that joining that community helped make it easier for him to deal with the whole thing, and maybe it can for them too.

I don't know if you guys didn't read the article, aren't smart enough to understand it, are so angry that even if you understood it you are choosing to pretend it's making an argument it didn't, or are just trolling, but the guy writing the article feels similarly about people who act on pedophilic impulses as you do. The author literally says he's spent his entire life resisting the sexual urges he feels towards children because he knows it's not okay to molest kids. So...kinda preaching to the choir here, guys.

 

[saskskier]

It's funny because, if you guys read/understood the article, you'd know that the writer explicitly states, several times, that acting on pedophilic impulses is not okay. The point of the article was to explain that pedophiles can't help their attraction to children, but that doesn't mean they have to act on it, but even pedophiles who have never acted on their impulses are still shunned as if they do. Part of the author's motivation for writing the article was to reach out to other people like him and let them know there is a whole community of people who feel urges towards kids but don't act on them, and that joining that community helped make it easier for him to deal with the whole thing, and maybe it can for them too.

I don't know if you guys didn't read the article, aren't smart enough to understand it, are so angry that even if you understood it you are choosing to pretend it's making an argument it didn't, or are just trolling, but the guy writing the article feels similarly about people who act on pedophilic impulses as you do. The author literally says he's spent his entire life resisting the sexual urges he feels towards children because he knows it's not okay to molest kids. So...kinda preaching to the choir here, guys.

No one is arguing that pedophilia is okay, but the same thing happened in the lgbtq community before it became accepted. How many stories are there from the lgbtq community about people hiding or resisting their attraction because it was not socially acceptable?

 

[PeppermillReno]

Nowhere has anyone stated that being a paedophile is okay and should be accepted. What the study instead has found is that paedophiles have a natural attraction to children. They can't help it. Which is true, and to be help these people and protect children from abuse is to understand why an offender commits a crime. This is criminology 101. I fail to see how stating that paedophilia is natural equates to saying it should be allowed. Children are vulnerable to coercion and are very persuasive. People also have a natural urge to commit arson and no one ever concluded from scholars finding that they meant that arson should be allowed. So why from a scholar saying that paedophilia is an orientation can you somehow find that it supports the idea that paedophilia should be normalized?

Of course you come into the thread and defend pedophilia (and here I was feeling like a little bit of a dickhead for calling you out like that but clearly it was dead on accurate.)

Anyone with the urge to do something sexual with a child deserves to die a slow painful death and should be executed. Its not natural its sick and disgusting and as I said these people should all be put down.

 

[Bogs]

No one is arguing that pedophilia is okay, but the same thing happened in the lgbtq community before it became accepted. How many stories are there from the lgbtq community about people hiding or resisting their attraction because it was not socially acceptable?

A lot, but that's much more to do with either fear of social ridicule than personally feeling that liking who you like is morally wrong. The only reason anyone feels personally guilty about being gay is when it has to do with their religion, or being told by their parents that it's wrong. Hopefully you agree that there's a big difference between someone saying: "I don't want to be gay because I'm worried what other people will do/think/say to/about me." or "I don't want to be gay because the bible says it's wrong" and what the author said, which is: "I don't want to act on my urges because sexually molesting children is clearly wrong." For gays, it's a desire to hide/not act because of fear of judgement from others, or God, not because the act of being gay itself is intrinsically morally wrong, like it is with pedophilia.

 

[saskskier]

A lot, but that's much more to do with either fear of social ridicule than personally feeling that liking who you like is morally wrong. The only reason anyone feels personally guilty about being gay is when it has to do with their religion, or being told by their parents that it's wrong. Hopefully you agree that there's a big difference between someone saying: "I don't want to be gay because I'm worried what other people will do/think/say to/about me." or "I don't want to be gay because the bible says it's wrong" and what the author said, which is: "I don't want to act on my urges because sexually molesting children is clearly wrong." For gays, it's a desire to hide/not act because of fear of judgement from others, or God, not because the act of being gay itself is intrinsically morally wrong, like it is with pedophilia.

You realize there is a long history of people believing homosexuality/trans/etc is morally wrong. People have lost their friends, families, jobs, and lives, been sent to prison, etc because of who they are attracted to. This is still true many places in the world today. People have had and continue to have legitimate reasons beyond religion or what their parents think (not to say those aren't legitimate reasons for those people) to hide who they are attracted to.

Just because something is now (generally) socially acceptable in Canada/US, doesn't mean that was always the case.

 

[Bogs]

You realize there is a long history of people believing homosexuality/trans/etc is morally wrong. People have lost their friends, families, jobs, and lives, been sent to prison, etc because of who they are attracted to. This is still true many places in the world today. People have had and continue to have legitimate reasons beyond religion or what their parents think (not to say those aren't legitimate reasons for those people) to hide who they are attracted to.

Just because something is now (generally) socially acceptable in Canada/US, doesn't mean that was always the case.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure all feeling of homosexuality being wrong stems from the bible and other religious texts like it. I know there are places in the non-western parts of the world that have never had any problem with homosexuality.

Can you be any more specific about instances where people have been ridiculed, scared to act on their urges, scared to admit to being homosexual for fear of stigma that isn't attached to social/religious ridicule?

 

[erikK]

Can you feel it, Bubbles? The way the shit clings to the air.

 

[S.J.W]

Of course you come into the thread and defend pedophilia (and here I was feeling like a little bit of a dickhead for calling you out like that but clearly it was dead on accurate.)

Anyone with the urge to do something sexual with a child deserves to die a slow painful death and should be executed. Its not natural its sick and disgusting and as I said these people should all be put down.

Nice strawman fallacy. Where did I defend paedophilia? If you want to help paedophiles manage their urges and not to molest any children then it should stand with reason that you remove the stigma and let people seek help in the same way people are prone to violence seek help to control their thoughts and emotions. If you just want to turn your back on it and pretend that it doesn't exist, you're not helping anyone.

 

[JayAppleJunior]

Nice strawman fallacy. Where did I defend paedophilia? If you want to help paedophiles manage their urges and not to molest any children then it should stand with reason that you remove the stigma and let people seek help in the same way people are prone to violence seek help to control their thoughts and emotions. If you just want to turn your back on it and pretend that it doesn't exist, you're not helping anyone.

hey fruitcake, what do you want? im shitting my pants right now laughing at you. like you waste time picking little bullshit fights on a ski forum trying to make some point and express your opinion.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA . I AM SHITTING MY PANTS RIGHT NOW LAUGHING AT U

 

[onenerdykid]

Nowhere has anyone stated that being a paedophile is okay and should be accepted. What the study instead has found is that paedophiles have a natural attraction to children. They can't help it. Which is true, and to be help these people and protect children from abuse is to understand why an offender commits a crime. This is criminology 101. I fail to see how stating that paedophilia is natural equates to saying it should be allowed. Children are vulnerable to coercion and are very persuasive. People also have a natural urge to commit arson and no one ever concluded from scholars finding that they meant that arson should be allowed. So why from a scholar saying that paedophilia is an orientation can you somehow find that it supports the idea that paedophilia should be normalized?

Of course you come into the thread and defend pedophilia (and here I was feeling like a little bit of a dickhead for calling you out like that but clearly it was dead on accurate.)

Anyone with the urge to do something sexual with a child deserves to die a slow painful death and should be executed. Its not natural its sick and disgusting and as I said these people should all be put down.

PeppermillReno, there is a HUGE difference between explaining something versus excusing something. The former seeks to merely describe what & why something occurred whereas the later seeks to remove the blame from what occurred. No where is SJW excusing pedophilia, here is merely explaining it but for some reason, you are claiming he is excusing and defending pedophilia when he's simply not.

The ultimate goal with something like pedophilia is to stop it from happening and the most effective way to do that is to understand it. Some people have bad desires, whether it be pedophilia or rape or murder or list your moral vice of choice. And we don't punish/praise people simply for their desires, we punish/praise people for how they act on their desires because that is what is within their control. Should a pedophile be legally punished when he/she acts on his/her desires? Absolutely, of course- we should do that with anyone who commits a horrible act. But should we punish people for merely having the desire of being a pedophile? Do you really want to go down this Orwellian road of punishing people for their thoughts & desires? We don't punish people who simply have the desire for rape or murder or arson, etc. We punish people for the acts they actually commit or are caught in the act of attempting to commit.

If we can better understand pedophiles, rapists, murderers, arsonists, etc. then we stand a better chance of being able to stop them before their desires turn into real acts. This does not in any way excuse them of their behavior and no one should understand it as such.

 

[Slush]

hey fruitcake, what do you want? im shitting my pants right now laughing at you. like you waste time picking little bullshit fights on a ski forum trying to make some point and express your opinion.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA . I AM SHITTING MY PANTS RIGHT NOW LAUGHING AT U

Way to contribute absolutely nothing, and look like a moron doing it

 

[PeppermillReno]

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure all feeling of homosexuality being wrong stems from the bible and other religious texts like it. I know there are places in the non-western parts of the world that have never had any problem with homosexuality.

Can you be any more specific about instances where people have been ridiculed, scared to act on their urges, scared to admit to being homosexual for fear of stigma that isn't attached to social/religious ridicule?

You are a fucking retard if you have no concept of history or knowledge of why there are laws against gays. Im not trying to say they were correct or anything but the reasons they existed are simple and obvious and you should feel like a moron for not knowing these things. In primitive societies (and maybe more importantly nomadic ones we are naturally hunters/gatherers) men were the more preferable sex slaves/lovers/what have you. Lets back up for a minute and remember these are male dominated societies women contributed little more than giving birth and cooking and that isn't being sexist just please accept for a fact that prior to the last century men basically ran every facet of life. So again homosexuality was for the most part across all walks of life condemned/illegal due to the fact that men would rather take male lovers than female ones because they could not get pregnant. You don't wanna be hunting/gathering with a preggo chick about to pop. And no there weren't rubbers/a pill thousands of years ago.

This stuff predates the bible and is just a simple underlying reason for why sucking another dude off has never been socially acceptable until VERY recent. Banning rich men from enslaving adolescent boys to be their sex slaves is why there have been laws against homosexuality for millennia.

 

[PeppermillReno]

Nice strawman fallacy. Where did I defend paedophilia? If you want to help paedophiles manage their urges and not to molest any children then it should stand with reason that you remove the stigma and let people seek help in the same way people are prone to violence seek help to control their thoughts and emotions. If you just want to turn your back on it and pretend that it doesn't exist, you're not helping anyone.

This is disgusting and terrible shame on you for defending this shit.

What you are trying to say is people can't control or help getting urges that are fucked up and wrong and that isn't true. You can absolutely not obsess over the fact that your neighbor has a hotter wife or more money than you. If you do obsess over that you are being an asshole and its something you can help.

If you get urges to fuck children you are getting them intentionally (like obsessing over your friend having a good job while you have a shit one) and deserve to be put down/executed.

 

[S.J.W]

This is disgusting and terrible shame on you for defending this shit.

What you are trying to say is people can't control or help getting urges that are fucked up and wrong and that isn't true. You can absolutely not obsess over the fact that your neighbor has a hotter wife or more money than you. If you do obsess over that you are being an asshole and its something you can help.

If you get urges to fuck children you are getting them intentionally (like obsessing over your friend having a good job while you have a shit one) and deserve to be put down/executed.

If you were any smarter you'd be classified as mentally retarded. Please stop discussing as everytime I read one of your posts a little part of me dies from how stupid someone can be. If you can't see the point I'm trying to make you're either trolling, being willfully ignorant or are just incredibly stupid.

 

[PeppermillReno]

If you were any smarter you'd be classified as mentally retarded. Please stop discussing as everytime I read one of your posts a little part of me dies from how stupid someone can be. If you can't see the point I'm trying to make you're either trolling, being willfully ignorant or are just incredibly stupid.

Oh what a shock. I make a perfectly good analogy and you resort to petty name calling. Why don't you just stop defending pedophiles???

 

[S.J.W]

Oh what a shock. I make a perfectly good analogy and you resort to petty name calling. Why don't you just stop defending pedophiles???

No you don't make a perfectly good analogy. Your analogy is shit because you seem to stil think I'm defending paedohphilia? I don't know if you failed english class, or your uncle got some of his money shot in your eye leaving you with a problem with reading but if you still genuinely think that somehow I'm defending paedophilia then go sit in the corner and don't leave it til you realize how wrong you are.

All I'm saying and I'll say it for the last time to help paedophiles control their urges and to make sure they don't act upon the urges we should help the paedophiles realize that their attractions are perfectly normal but they are not allowed to act upon them as children are vulnerable and should not be taken advantage upon. Otherwise if you still pretend paedophilia does not exist you will end up with a fuckload of people with built up sexual frustration who will end up raping a child. Understand now? Probably not.

 

[Bogs]

You are a fucking retard if you have no concept of history or knowledge of why there are laws against gays. Im not trying to say they were correct or anything but the reasons they existed are simple and obvious and you should feel like a moron for not knowing these things. In primitive societies (and maybe more importantly nomadic ones we are naturally hunters/gatherers) men were the more preferable sex slaves/lovers/what have you. Lets back up for a minute and remember these are male dominated societies women contributed little more than giving birth and cooking and that isn't being sexist just please accept for a fact that prior to the last century men basically ran every facet of life. So again homosexuality was for the most part across all walks of life condemned/illegal due to the fact that men would rather take male lovers than female ones because they could not get pregnant. You don't wanna be hunting/gathering with a preggo chick about to pop. And no there weren't rubbers/a pill thousands of years ago.

This stuff predates the bible and is just a simple underlying reason for why sucking another dude off has never been socially acceptable until VERY recent. Banning rich men from enslaving adolescent boys to be their sex slaves is why there have been laws against homosexuality for millennia.

I know it's no use to argue you with you here, and it really isn't even all that relevant, so I'm just going to say "if you say so," even though the argument you just made (that men taking men as lovers was advantageous for tribe survival, therefore they outlawed it) makes no sense.

If you get urges to fuck children you are getting them intentionally (like obsessing over your friend having a good job while you have a shit one) and deserve to be put down/executed.

So you intentionally get urges to have sex with girls? You've never once in your life just felt horny for no specific reason?

Surely you can see that a sexual urge and jealousy towards someone's job aren't exactly equatable as far as controllable feelings go?

 

[onenerdykid]

a simple underlying reason for why sucking another dude off has never been socially acceptable until VERY recent. Banning rich men from enslaving adolescent boys to be their sex slaves is why there have been laws against homosexuality for millennia.

You clearly don't know your history concerning Ancient Greece, Rome, Celts, etc. And you also don't understand the laws concerning homosexuality, on a global scale, and how even today they commonly apply only to men and not to women. Kinda funny, don't you think, that the men who wrote the laws outlawed it for men, but often not for women?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory

If you get urges to fuck children you are getting them intentionally (like obsessing over your friend having a good job while you have a shit one) and deserve to be put down/executed.

Let me know the next time you choose to get angry. Or choose to get horny. Or choose to feel sad or hungry, etc. It never happens, with any feeling or desire. Feelings are reactions to stimuli, not choices. Watch a sad movie, you get sad. Someone calls your mom a whore, you get angry. These feelings are responses to stimuli you are exposed to. What you actually choose is how to control these feelings or not. You choose how angry you get, for how long, in what way, etc. These are the aspects we control and choose to do or not. This is fundamental moral philosophy, moral psychology, neurology etc.

 

[Slush]

Nowhere has anyone stated that being a paedophile is okay and should be accepted. What the study instead has found is that paedophiles have a natural attraction to children. They can't help it. Which is true, and to be help these people and protect children from abuse is to understand why an offender commits a crime. This is criminology 101. I fail to see how stating that paedophilia is natural equates to saying it should be allowed. Children are vulnerable to coercion and are very persuasive. People also have a natural urge to commit arson and no one ever concluded from scholars finding that they meant that arson should be allowed. So why from a scholar saying that paedophilia is an orientation can you somehow find that it supports the idea that paedophilia should be normalized?

Well put, and I agree with the statement that we should be helping these people to suppress their drives. You can't help feeling angry, or sad, or horny, or in their case attracted to children. It's up to them to suppress the urges, and control themselves. You don't choose to be a pedophile, but you can choose the contain your pedophelia and not act upon your urges.

Of course you come into the thread and defend pedophilia (and here I was feeling like a little bit of a dickhead for calling you out like that but clearly it was dead on accurate.)

Anyone with the urge to do something sexual with a child deserves to die a slow painful death and should be executed. Its not natural its sick and disgusting and as I said these people should all be put down.

Christ I had no idea one man could be so damn stupid. Maybe if you spent 10 seconds actually reading what someone says instead of taking every utterance someone has as a confirmation of your emotion driven crusade of ignorance, you might actually become intelligent enough to wipe your own fucking ass. I sometimes don't agree with SJW, but I feel compelled to say something because of how hilariously stupid this is. Someone says something, you interpret it to whatever you want, and then fight them for a completely different point. You are the king of the straw man fallacy and you need to read what people say or shut the fuck up

 

[.Hugo.]

The only way to be 100% sure they will not act on their urges is to put them under 6ft of dirt

 

[onenerdykid]

The only way to be 100% sure they will not act on their urges is to put them under 6ft of dirt

While that's technically accurate, are you prepared to be consistent and apply that to every urge that has the potential to become a horrible crime?

Let's say that there is a man who has pedophilic urges but has never actually acted on them. He's actually done nothing wrong, except have these urges. He lives his life and otherwise is a productive member of society who contributes to his community. Do you really want to put him to death for simply having these urges?

Or let's say there is a man who has murderous urges because he hates humanity and how our species negatively affects the planet. He really wants to kill people but has never done it. He's actually done nothing wrong, except have these urges. He lives his life and otherwise is a productive member of society who contributes to his community. Would you be consistent enough to put someone like this to death because he has urges to illegally kill people?

Killing someone for their feelings/desires/urges has huge ramifications for things many of us feel but never actually act upon. While no one is specifically defending pedophilia, there is a framework here that needs to be carefully navigated or else we will find ourselves at the hands of the Thought Police and killed for things we've never done.

 

[.Hugo.]

While that's technically accurate, are you prepared to be consistent and apply that to every urge that has the potential to become a horrible crime?

Let's say that there is a man who has pedophilic urges but has never actually acted on them. He's actually done nothing wrong, except have these urges. He lives his life and otherwise is a productive member of society who contributes to his community. Do you really want to put him to death for simply having these urges?

Or let's say there is a man who has murderous urges because he hates humanity and how our species negatively affects the planet. He really wants to kill people but has never done it. He's actually done nothing wrong, except have these urges. He lives his life and otherwise is a productive member of society who contributes to his community. Would you be consistent enough to put someone like this to death because he has urges to illegally kill people?

Killing someone for their feelings/desires/urges has huge ramifications for things many of us feel but never actually act upon. While no one is specifically defending pedophilia, there is a framework here that needs to be carefully navigated or else we will find ourselves at the hands of the Thought Police and killed for things we've never done.

I didnt say we should kill them for having urges, that would be an unjust killing because as you said they have done nothing wrong. It was just kind of a general counter response to everyone saying these guys can be helped. But in reality they might resist these urges for years or even decades, but it just takes 1 little thing to happen for them to snap.

 

[FastSpeed]

I think people need to stop trying rationalizing their idiotic behavior/thoughts. Like get the fuck over it, molesting children is fucked up and those people should get locked in jail forever.

 

[cornholio]

Everytime I scroll past this thread I see the word "Philadelphia".

 

[Charlie_Kelly]

Damn its almost like people forget pedophilia has been around since the dawn of man. Obviously its wrong, but its also been seen as culturally acceptable in many cultures across the globe.

 

[PeppermillReno]

I know it's no use to argue you with you here, and it really isn't even all that relevant, so I'm just going to say "if you say so," even though the argument you just made (that men taking men as lovers was advantageous for tribe survival, therefore they outlawed it) makes no sense.

So you intentionally get urges to have sex with girls? You've never once in your life just felt horny for no specific reason?

Surely you can see that a sexual urge and jealousy towards someone's job aren't exactly equatable as far as controllable feelings go?

No, I don't get 'urges' thinking someone is attractive isn't an urge and I don't pop wood at the sight of a hot girl unless shes touching me or something. And on the flip side when Im chillling out naked in the steam room at the gym (not dragging a wet bathing suit around) I don't give a fuck if there is a gay guy next to me hes not going to get a hard on even if he thinks I'm attractive.

My explanation for why outlawing homosexuality was somewhat progressive is that very simply birth control and contraceptives are new phenomenons and the old fashioned way to do coitus without a kid resulting is guy on guy buttstuff.

You do know that in most states the age of consent for guy on guy buttstuff is 18 and not 15 or 16 like hetero intercourse???

 

[Bogs]

No, I don't get 'urges'

Well that's pretty amazing. You really never see an attractive girl and think, without meaning to, "it would be nice to have sex with her?" You never ever make plans with a girl and start the night hoping that it would end with you two having sex? Remarkable. One in a million sort of thing, I think.

How does that work for having sex/getting a boner? Do you have to sit there for a while convincing yourself that this is something you want to do? Do you make a pros and cons list and weigh out the positives vs. the negatives really carefully before deciding? How long does it take you to get to the point where you're sure you want to have sex? If you never feel an urge to have sex with a girl, how do you decide to do it or not? Why do you ever do it? Do you ever do it? I know for me, personally, if I didn't have an urge to have sex with a girl, no way would I go through the trouble, time, or effort it takes to actually do it. Must suck that you only ever have sex because it's a social construct that you have to take part in in order to fit in, and not because you actually have any desire to do so. I'm sorry, man, that's really rough.

 

[PeppermillReno]

Well that's pretty amazing. You really never see an attractive girl and think, without meaning to, "it would be nice to have sex with her?" You never ever make plans with a girl and start the night hoping that it would end with you two having sex? Remarkable. One in a million sort of thing, I think.

How does that work for having sex/getting a boner? Do you have to sit there for a while convincing yourself that this is something you want to do? Do you make a pros and cons list and weigh out the positives vs. the negatives really carefully before deciding? How long does it take you to get to the point where you're sure you want to have sex? If you never feel an urge to have sex with a girl, how do you decide to do it or not? Why do you ever do it? Do you ever do it? I know for me, personally, if I didn't have an urge to have sex with a girl, no way would I go through the trouble, time, or effort it takes to actually do it. Must suck that you only ever have sex because it's a social construct that you have to take part in in order to fit in, and not because you actually have any desire to do so. I'm sorry, man, that's really rough.

No man the urges are minimal when you are a normal human being. You probably shower in the gym with a bathing suit for fear of getting a boner. That isn't normal. A chick has to do something to start getting me aroused not simply be attractive and in my line of sight (might not have to be physical but you get the point.)

For example I love cougars. I have posted up a pic of me skiing in the alps with a cutie old enough to be my mom on this website. Im in real estate you get some seriously hot cougars but given the relation to them and nature of the work friendly small talk is always friendly small talk and just not flirting.

In another industry where you would be actual coworkers getting automatic paychecks every week as opposed to a bunch of independent contractors (you don't compete head to head but its every person for themselves) there would be sexual tension but it just doesn't exist due to the nature of the work. So hot cougars that I would go into the bathroom to jerk it to under other circumstances if I was working in an office and they were the secretary or admin (we are talking about 70-80% of these ladies being hot ugly older women simply don't last in real estate) might as well be relatives. Its just natural given the nature of the professional relationship. Same thing with someone off limits (friends wife or a child or relative.) The grey area is small and just that grey area (a 17 year old who could be 19/20.)

Sorry if you have no morals and think its OK to think terrible thoughts.

 

[Bogs]

No man the urges are minimal

So hot cougars that I would go into the bathroom to jerk it to under other circumstances

So...you DO get sexual urges?

Nobody's saying that people walk around all the time, getting horny as hell at a slight breeze, but if there's a girl I'm dating and I plan a night out with her, I certainly look forward to the possibility of having sex with her at the end of it. Don't you? You never make plans with a girl and think "it would be great if this ended with us having sex?"

I would argue that it's far more abnormal that you don't think this way than it is that I do.

 

[onenerdykid]

Sorry if you have no morals and think its OK to think terrible thoughts.

You're really discussing two different (yet related) things: being a good person (focusing character) and doing the right thing (focusing on moral acts). A good person not only does the right thing, but also enjoys doing it and experiences "pain" when doing/experiencing bad things. His urges are in-line with his actions, both in the right way. He not only wouldn't be a pedophile, but he wouldn't even have pedophilic urges/desires/feelings. I think we all agree this is the ideal scenario, and this is straight out of Aristotle. But I do think it's a bit unrealistic to expect ALL people to be & act this way.

Honestly, I would be stoked if more people simply did the right thing, regardless if their feelings/desires align with the act. Let's work on that first.

 

[ascent_studios]

Full disclaimer: Everything I am about to say is completely my personal opinion and I will probably get a lot of shit for this. I am sorry if I offend you...

Everybody is born a man or a woman (unless something goes wrong). That is what you are. I don't care about gay or lesbian but transgenders and cross dressers piss me off. Stay the gender you are and don't make a fucking big deal out of all this shit. I saw online a list of all the genders now; theirs like 52 or something ridiculous like that. Why? Whats the point?

Also now a full grown man can go into the same bathroom as a small young girl

/rant

 

[Bogs]

Everybody is born a man or a woman (unless something goes wrong). That is what you are. I don't care about gay or lesbian but transgenders and cross dressers piss me off. Stay the gender you are and don't make a fucking big deal out of all this shit. I saw online a list of all the genders now; theirs like 52 or something ridiculous like that. Why? Whats the point?

Also now a full grown man can go into the same bathroom as a small young girl

/rant

I mean obviously your argument is unbelievably ignorant, but besides all that...what the hell does this have to do with pedophilia? Clearly you just want to provoke some people into saying mean things to you so you can feel like you're really edgy and subversive.

Your post was about as relevant as going to an environmental rally/march and protesting abortion.

 

[ascent_studios]

I mean obviously your argument is unbelievably ignorant, but besides all that...what the hell does this have to do with pedophilia? Clearly you just want to provoke some people into saying mean things to you so you can feel like you're really edgy and subversive.

Your post was about as relevant as going to an environmental rally/march and protesting abortion.

Ik i actually don't know what the fuck I was thinking, I was just trying to get it out of my system

 

[Sno.]

It's only a matter of time. The social progressive movement doesn't have any actual disired end state, they just want to keep 'progressing.' First it was homosexuality, and really, that was fine. Some conservatives asked if homosexuality is ok, what is next. They were ignored because that question is silly. Two adults, making adult decisions. Then it was transgender tolerance, and sure, we can go along with that. Your're an adult. go ahead and cross dress and pretend you're something you're not. We might even redefine gender to make it whatever is less likely to hurt feelings. Then (and now) it was time to turn to transgender acceptance, and now if you don't think a dude should be using the same bathroom as girls or vise versa you're a fucking bigot. If you're school doesn't make it ok, they can get their funding cut, regardless of what the local PTA thinks.

It's the dumb fucking progressive social movement. They just keep on going and needing to be progressive. So yes, pedophilia and beasteality are going to be accptable in the not so distant future, because they are people too. Or some progressive bullshit. The success of this movement has led to the rise of folks like Tiny Hands Trump.

So that silly question is no longer silly.

Did you make it through this entire post without using the word "awareness"...don't forget about all the awareness this is causing/is for. You should just be aware that pedophiles exist and have a right to, and if you don't want them around your children you should probably get some more awareness.