Poll: Pedophilia

[Iron Lightning]

Good sir, you must realize that asking asking a prepubescent to be sexually active is akin to asking a sexually healthy woman to stop menstruating. It is simply not possible to have sex with a child without raping them. I can not abide by any society wherein rape is legal.

I find your way of thinking quite dangerous, first of menstruation is a bodily function, it is needed for the survival of the human race. To compare that to something wich has no impact what so ever on the survival of the human race, wich is also optional, it's the same kind of logic creationists use to draw analogies between animate and inanimate objects to prove the existence of a designer.

Also your idea of what is concidered rape is not yours to begin with. There is no statement deciding what is rape or not except in the laws of your particular country. Decided by that particular society. for you to personally claim exlusives on being right, and everyone that thinks otherwise is wrong, can definetly cause massive damage. How do wars break out?

I'm sorry if this seem personal, its not you just the way you put forth your thoughts.

Sir, might I ask you to see my post directly bellow the one which I am herein quoting (I hadn't wished to share my experience, but I have been given reason to do so.) With the menstruation analogy, I meant to say that it is as biologically impossible for a prepubescent to be sexually active as it is for a sexually healthy woman to not menstruate.

My idea of rape is simply unwanted sexual contact. It is impossible for someone who is not capable of sexual activity to want it. Therefore, sex with a prepubescent can not be anything but rape, as I define it. Some things should simply never be a part of any society that I would want to associate with, being okay with rape is certainly part of that. Yes, wars do get started because of absolutes, not all wars are unjust. Hitler decided on an absolute that all Jews, Gypsies, and homosexuals should be murdered or worked to death. The Allies of World War II decided on an absolute that Hitler's absolute was wrong. Sometimes absolutes are just, because evil, true evil undefined by society's ethos exists, and the fact that it must be stopped is self-evident.

If you are okay with rape, that's fine, but if you ever try to perform rape, then I will do everything in my power to halt your attempt and/or punish you.

 

[Iron Lightning]

As for you, OneStrikeOut, if you have neither firsthand experience nor documented professional sources, then I would ask you not to comment on matters of trauma which I doubt you have the ability to understand the scope of. As I do have firsthand experience I can tell you that you are completely incorrect in your misinformed opinion. I had no concept of sex at age four nor did I have any concept of society's view on it. That did not detract from how unbearably traumatic and damaging being raped was.

Even if it has no effect, I want to say my sympathies goes out to all victims of abuse.
My point was never to try to diminish the fact that this is extremely harmful to children.
But rather to point out the inherrent problem with deciding what is right and wrong based on a system created to sustain itself rather then for the best of the individual.

While not a victim of sexual abuse, I certainly know what it means to be alienated due to irrational beliefs caused by abuse.
All individuals deal with this differently.
I did not talk at all untill I was moved out of the abusive enviroment. Experience lends itself extremely poorely to words. So if there is anything in my words that makes your suffering seem trivialized, thats just meaningless words and they have connection to what you have lived.
I mean nothing ill by them.

If you mean to apologize, sir, then I accept. I must, however, ask you to refine your grasp of the language so that you may make your point clearly, without causing offense. While I understand your issue with using a system designed to sustain itself as a moral compass, it is my belief that all abuse has an effect on the victim, if it did not then it would not be called abuse.

 

[DarkPanda XIII]

Well, here's the thing, Pedophilia is sad because it's *normally* having stuff done to children of 12 and below, which really is sick.

Funny how back in the day, and even in some countries now, 14 and above is considered workable by marriage. But in America, it is condemned to statutory rape.

So yes, pedophilia is wrong

 

[OneStrikeOut]

If you mean to apologize, sir, then I accept. I must, however, ask you to refine your grasp of the language so that you may make your point clearly, without causing offense. While I understand your issue with using a system designed to sustain itself as a moral compass, it is my belief that all abuse has an effect on the victim, if it did not then it would not be called abuse.

Ok I'll try to focus on what I feel is the problem in this issue, Damage control.
If Pre pubescent sexual activity wasn't as distant from reality as it is today.
It would be easier to help the victim to handle the experience and not suffer the deep long lasting trauma that is evident in most cases.
Not to make it more accepted to commit the act, but letting victims know that having bad experiences is not in it self bad.

To throw around remarks of how wrong this is and sick and revolting, is not helping.
On the contrary it is further alienating this experience from what is accepted to have.

Thank you for your time.

Peace!

 

[Booze Zombie]

Go watch the Louis Theroux documentary where he goes round a prison mainly for paedophiles - they aren't big and hairy, I was taking the piss, but generally are plump with glasses and something "off" about them. It's very weird and there is probably a paper to be had with it, but there certainly is a trend in appearance with paedophiles.

I hate to be pseudo-psychological about that, but I think that could link in with the theory my father told me that paedophilia, that childhood being invented caused a massive rise in it's occurrence.

The off, fat, momma's boy appearance implying someone stuck in the idea of innocence, dreaming of being a thin "innocent child" again.
Then they realise they can't be and take their anger out on the world.

Perhaps we need to destroy the idea of childhood and just get on with the idea that children are smaller people to stop things like this happening so much?
Then you only have to worry about people with "size" issues, as opposed to innocence-lost fiends.

Anyway, thanks for responding, have a good one.

 

[HvD]

Childern are, by definition, not sexually mature; therefore it is impossible to have sex with them without raping them.

I want no part of a society where rape is legal.

Sorry Pal, I don't approve of anyone sticking anything into anyone who isn't legal, and I'm pretty sure most people feel the same way.

In some places on this earth homosexuality is illegal, so if I may extrapolate and really stretch an assumption here (I am not in any way implying that you actually think like this), your definition of what is right and wrong is based on the laws of the land, therefore if an 80 year old having sex with an 8 year old was legal you would approve and if homosexual acts were illegal you would disapprove.

Perhaps my point is that you should really make up your own mind instead of letting the govornment dictate your morals, otherwise you could end up a mindless person incapable of individual thought and subject to the whims of those who make up the rules. I mean seriously would you immediately make Saudi morals your own if you went there?

Good sir, you must realize that asking asking a prepubescent to be sexually active is akin to asking a sexually healthy woman to stop menstruating. It is simply not possible to have sex with a child without raping them. I can not abide by any society wherein rape is legal.

Although you are quite right insofar as morality being partially dictated by society. However, as a free-minded man, I find myself opposed to rape. I like to think that I would still be so in spite of any of society's or government's (the formalization of society) edicts.

I would appreciate it if you take biological limitations into account in your arguments. Of course, this is assuming that you don't advocate rape, please correct me if I am wrong in this assumption.

I was merely questioning the logic set forth by the person I quoted, as to whether their notions of right and wrong being strictly based on law make sense. Secondly, without getting into all the nitty gritty of why your argument is somewhat flawed stating that children cannot derive pleasure from sex, I would like to catergoically state that as someone who was sexually abused by their own mother from before I could even talk, until I left home, I am 100% against rape, peadophilia etc. And as some people have already stated I don't think that this thread really belongs on this site.

 

[Unesh52]

Too long, edited out.

I'm sorry I upset you, I was trying to be as objective as possible to avoid that. No, I didn't do any outside research, but I wasn't really trying to make any assertions. I just asked a question.

Though I don't disagree with or invalidate anything you've said, you have to understand that for someone with little or no experience with this subject, the idea seems a little absurd. The fact that a child does not understand what is happening to him doesn't imply that it is hurting him, and I had reasoned that children experienced things they didn't understand on a daily basis. I've also heard it stated that children "aren't ready to handle" sex, or something to the effect. That seemed a little perplexing all by itself, but that may be because I've often heard the expression applied to teen relations to imply that teenagers would abuse sexuality to manipulate each other or explore it irresponsibly, leading to pregnancy, STDs, or what have you. That understanding doesn't make much sense when applied to young children, you see. Anyway, I was only trying to isolate the part of the interaction that results in mental trauma. A proper scientific understanding could lead to greater consistency and practicality in sex laws than is afforded by traditional cultural and moral standards. In fact, I'd say the implications of such an understanding could extend to other areas of public disagreement; the thing that comes to mind is censorship of sexuality in the media.

To reiterate: I don't deny that kids have been hurt by rape, including yourself. I'm sorry for what happened to you and I wouldn't want anyone else to be in that situation. However, I can entertain the idea that the source of the pain and trauma endured by these individuals may be more complex than what it is typically given credit for. Further, I entertain the idea that sex and kids may not be ENTIRELY incompatible. No, I do not support child rape, I only want to understand more about how this works.

note: sorry I couldn't reply sooner, my computer crashed.

 

[Iron Lightning]

Too long, edited out.

I'm sorry I upset you, I was trying to be as objective as possible to avoid that. No, I didn't do any outside research, but I wasn't really trying to make any assertions. I just asked a question.

Though I don't disagree with or invalidate anything you've said, you have to understand that for someone with little or no experience with this subject, the idea seems a little absurd. The fact that a child does not understand what is happening to him doesn't imply that it is hurting him, and I had reasoned that children experienced things they didn't understand on a daily basis. I've also heard it stated that children "aren't ready to handle" sex, or something to the effect. That seemed a little perplexing all by itself, but that may be because I've often heard the expression applied to teen relations to imply that teenagers would abuse sexuality to manipulate each other or explore it irresponsibly, leading to pregnancy, STDs, or what have you. That understanding doesn't make much sense when applied to young children, you see. Anyway, I was only trying to isolate the part of the interaction that results in mental trauma. A proper scientific understanding could lead to greater consistency and practicality in sex laws than is afforded by traditional cultural and moral standards. In fact, I'd say the implications of such an understanding could extend to other areas of public disagreement; the thing that comes to mind is censorship of sexuality in the media.

To reiterate: I don't deny that kids have been hurt by rape, including yourself. I'm sorry for what happened to you and I wouldn't want anyone else to be in that situation. However, I can entertain the idea that the source of the pain and trauma endured by these individuals may be more complex than what it is typically given credit for. Further, I entertain the idea that sex and kids may not be ENTIRELY incompatible. No, I do not support child rape, I only want to understand more about how this works.

note: sorry I couldn't reply sooner, my computer crashed.

Thank you, sir, for your civility. The fact is that, to a child, sex is as incomprehensible as the 5th dimension of space. This causes the happenstance to be internally repressed. While it is true that children experience things that they don't understand quite frequently, nearly all they experience in understandable. Sex is, quite simply, not understandable to a child. This is in conjunction with the natural feeling of utter stress when placed in a situation of powerlessness. The body experiences immense trauma whenever the fight-or-flight response ceases to be a viable option. A person tied to a chair will be incredibly traumatized even if he or she is under no real danger. Even when sexual contact with a minor has benevolent intentions, damage can be done through denial of the fight-or-flight response.

There is also the question of sexual orientation. It is becoming increasingly evident that sexual orientation is a product of genetics. Even though children do not have a sexual identity they will almost certainly develop one. Whatever sexual identity they develop may disagree with any sort of sexual contact experienced during prepubescence. A straight man would certainly be harmed by any homosexual activity in his childhood just as he would be harmed in his adulthood.

From a biological standpoint, sex with children is illogical, since all children lack the the capacity for reproduction. I realize that a form of this argument is also used against homosexuality, however the situation is different insofar as pedophilia goes. The difference being that consenting homosexual relationships are usually made between two homosexuals while sexual relations involving pedophilia only involve one pedophile. It is very hard to prove a relationship to be consensual if both parties do not share the same perversions. The child in question may grow up to become a pedophile, but as he or she is not at the time, the child is effectively equivalent to an asexual adult.

Which brings me to my next point, that asexual people can not have sexual relationships without being raped. Please note that I am not referring to demisexuals, whom have no love for sex, but may perform the act out of admiration for their partner. It is my experience that children are pretty much asexual. One might call into question whether children are asexual or demisexual, to which I would reply that the lack of a true scientific study into this subject leaves this in question. However, since children are not biologically capable of performing sex acts (they are only capable of having sex acts performed on them) it makes sense for children to be asexual.

While it is technically possible for children to not be ENTIRELY incompatible with sex; the legalization of such would, much like a legalization of incest, cause many problems. The general consensus is that most children are harmed by sexual contact at a latter age if not at the age at which the act occurs. An explosion of child rape would also occur if such legalization were to happen.

Sex with children is most simply wrong for all of the above reasons. I admit to the possibility of these problems not being an issue in certain special cases, but I can not abide by any system that attempts to treat all individuals as if they belong to the minority of special cases.

Post Script: While I am against all forms of censorship, I do believe that it would be wise to include a preceding disclaimer for the more objectionable subjects.

 

[TheEml]

.

 

[TheEml]

.

 

[TheEml]

.

 

[NoNameMcgee]

I completely agree. now youve met two btw. me. anyways, it is a fantasy, a fetish. nothing more. there are millions of people with this fetish. the amount of people who act on this fixation? way less.

Good on you for not being ashamed mate. Though I do have some concerns with what you wrote about it 'not being emotionally scarring'... When quite clearly it would be, if someone were to act on their fetish...

It's a very complicated subject for sure, with more gray areas than most people expect without delving deeper. Would it be too prying of me to ask how you indulge in your fantasies? I am curious if you only fantasize in your head or if you have took it a little further (porn etc) which I would consider to be wrong if it wasn't anime or something.

Also welcome to the Escapist

 

[TheEml]

.

 

[RobertG]

Hello, my name is not Robert. I like fantasy, science, symphonic metal, and I am sexually attracted to children.

This is a very complicated issue, and theres not enough research being done in this area. I would love to see some enlightenment on the subject of paraphilias, seeing as how I have quite a few myself. I wonder just how messed up my childhood must have been to have given me all these little quirks

"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."--William Shakespeare


Heres a site that helps separate some of the myth from the fact.
http://pedophileophobia.com/index.htm
More specifically
http://pedophileophobia.com/Myth%20vs.%20Fact.htm
(The site was acting up for me, if it appears as if the text is missing hit ctrl+A to highlight everything and make it show up)

And to those people who think children aren't sexual in any way, bullocks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexuality#Early_childhood

Oh, and I'm not a "true" pedophile, I.E. my arousal is not strictly bound to children. My pedophilic interests are strictly fantasy, aided by loads of Lolicon.

 

[TheEml]

.

 

[TheEml]

.

 

[TheEml]

.