Support NeoGAF

[SatansReverence]

defense of pedophiles

What you call "defense of paedophiles" is actually turning the light onto the cancer that is modern identity politics and oppression olympics.

 

[Ailynn]

Whats the + for

Asexual, Intersex, and possibly more...but I find it hard to believe that "Pedosexual" will ever be an accepted letter in the group. Also, this "slippery slope" talk is highly upsetting.

I've seen Kevin Bacon's The Woodsman, and I had sympathy for his character and his struggle. I know it is possible for some people to become psychologically damaged, to find themselves attracted to children, to know it is wrong, and not act on those desires.

However, I refuse to believe people are born as pedophiles. The human psyche can be a frail thing, and I'm sure pedophilia can be a result of sexual abuse as a child. I understand how such a horrifying tragedy is possible, but shouldn't this just further prove how unacceptable pedophilia should be seen in society? Children are the victims here in every sense.

 

[Dunki]

Consider my perspective: we have constant whining how the "alt-Right" has infiltrated GAF because there are posts in threads about Treyvon Martin regarding IQ (which were moderated) or not-hateful posts about Trump (clearly we're Nazis!).

And then here we have a thread about a criminal getting caught with child porn and yet we find defense of pedophiles when the subject of the thread is a criminal. Boggles the mind. #notallpedos. We wouldn't see news articles about other crimes (spousal abuse, theft, murder, etc) getting treated with such sympathy.

Also, I do not ascribe to the notion that "making them look like a monster is not the right way to do it". Vilifying awful behavior is exactly how we've done it and it has done a pretty good job of expunging some pretty awful behaviors from the past. Any person who has any sexual attraction to children should feel repulsed by that side of themselves. The lack of repulsion is what creates room in their psyche for the attraction in the first place. Does it mean the person should live in constant shame? No. It means they should seek out help, I agree.

The other issue is that child trafficking is a very real thing. I can't help but see a much darker side of all this "sympathy" and "acceptance": it will normalize the ongoing child sex trade that is currently occurring. Sorry, but the poor widdle child-lovers can sit in discomfort (as they should) for a while longer while we focus on the creeps who produce as well as consume child porn and who abuse and rape children to do so.

Again I am all for punishing the people who for example share real childporn and are the cause of these child trafficking etc. the moment you act on it you do not deserve Sympathy anymore but before I think you do. I also believe that fictional form of childporn be it fantasy or drawings etc are acceptable to help these people ease their desires so they do not have to keep them in until they burst and really do some bad stuff.

As for the Race and IQQ stuff I think it is stupid but still would never call anyone a nazi who wants to discuss this. I have no real political line. I am more conservative on some points while I more left leaning on others. Always depends on the topic. I just think like with everything we should not stigmatize and generalize people based on something they did not chose to be.

 

[Dunki]

Asexual, Intersex, and possibly more...but I find it hard to believe that "Pedosexual" will ever be an accepted letter in the group. Also, this "slippery slope" talk is highly upsetting.

I've seen Kevin Bacon's The Woodsman, and I had sympathy for his character and his struggle. I know it is possible for some people to become psychologically damaged, to find themselves attracted to children, to know it is wrong, and not act on those desires.

However, I refuse to believe people are born as pedophiles. The human psyche can be a frail thing, and I'm sure pedophilia can be a result of sexual abuse as a child. I understand how such a horrifying tragedy is possible, but shouldn't this just further prove how unacceptable pedophilia should be seen in society? Children are the victims here in every sense.

The causes of pedophilia (and other paraphilias) are not known. There is some evidence that pedophilia may run in families, though it is unclear whether this stems from genetics or learned behavior.

Other factors, such as abnormalities in male sexual hormones or the brain chemical serotonin, have not been proven as factors in the development of paraphilias or pedophilia. A history of childhood sexual abuse is also a potential factor in the development of pedophilias but this, too, has not been proven.

Behavioral learning models suggest that a child who is the victim or observer of inappropriate sexual behaviors learns to imitate and is later reinforced for these same behaviors. These individuals are deprived of normal social and sexual contacts and thus seek gratification through less socially acceptable means. Physiological models focus on the relationship between hormones, behavior, and the central nervous system with a particular interest in the role of aggression and male sexual hormones.

Individuals may become aware of their sexual interest in children around the time of puberty. Pedophilia may be a lifelong condition, but pedophilic disorder includes elements that may change over time (distress, psychosocial impairment, tendency to act on urges).

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/pedophilia

Problem is we do not know much about it because it is so stigmatized that research surveys etc is hard to come by. This is what we should change IMO. But you normally do not choise your sexual ddessires and atractions. They were alsways there the thing is what does it do to trigger these desires fetishes.

 

[Yoshi]

3. You accept sexual preference is nothing more than a personal choice and lose any sort of victim mentality attached to it

What does personal choice mean to you? Can you choose frely what you are attracted to? I am pretty certain most pedophiles (certainly those that commit no crimes) would prefer not to be attracted children. Battling an urge that is detrimental to others is probably not an easy thing to maintain for ones whole life.

I think that Kevin did make a good point and carefully explained it. It becomes difficult because many people do not differentiate between child molesters (which in many cases are pedophile) and pedophiles (which may also be child molesters, but not necessarily and there appears to be a large amount, considering the numbers given above probably the majority, who do not act on their sexual urges). It leads to a certain disconnect if someone appears to be defending pedophiles, because if you equate pedophiles and child molesters, then that's a horrible thing to do. If you can differentiate the concepts though, then Kevin's account is pretty fair.

 

[Mohonky]

And then here we have a thread about a criminal getting caught with child porn and yet we find defense of pedophiles when the subject of the thread is a criminal. Boggles the mind. #notallpedos. We wouldn't see news articles about other crimes (spousal abuse, theft, murder, etc) getting treated with such sympathy.

Who is defending this guy?

The example you have given is exactly why people are saying not to be so quick to judge others and apply them as one group. People aren't defending this guy at all, no one is defending anyone who engages in criminal activity (especially ones where the victims have little change of defending themselves), they are saying don't go putting the horse before the cart assuming people already are criminals before they actually commit any crime.

 

[SatansReverence]

What does personal choice mean to you? Can you choose frely what you are attracted to? I am pretty certain most pedophiles (certainly those that commit no crimes) would prefer not to be attracted children. Battling an urge that is detrimental to others is probably not an easy thing to maintain for ones whole life.

I think that Kevin did make a good point and carefully explained it. It becomes difficult because many people do not differentiate between child molesters (which in many cases are pedophile) and pedophiles (which may also be child molesters, but not necessarily and there appears to be a large amount, considering the numbers given above probably the majority, who do not act on their sexual urges). It leads to a certain disconnect if someone appears to be defending pedophiles, because if you equate pedophiles and child molesters, then that's a horrible thing to do. If you can differentiate the concepts though, then Kevin's account is pretty fair.

Edited my original post to better reflect that they aren't actual questions and merely additive to the original quotes hypothetical questions.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Again I am all for punishing the people who for example share real childporn and are the cause of these child trafficking etc. the moment you act on it you do not deserve Sympathy anymore but before I think you do. I also believe that fictional form of childporn be it fantasy or drawings etc are acceptable to help these people ease their desires so they do not have to keep them in until they burst and really do some bad stuff.

As for the Race and IQQ stuff I think it is stupid but still would never call anyone a nazi who wants to discuss this. I have no real political line. I am more conservative on some points while I more left leaning on others. Always depends on the topic. I just think like with everything we should not stigmatize and generalize people based on something they did not chose to be.

Not always the case. It's easy to say "I never wanted this" but what decisions did they make and what content did they avoid to help them with their illness?

Pedophelia and porn go hand-in-hand. It is true that many pedophiles never abuse a child. But the huge elephant in the room -- and the subject matter of this criminal's activity -- is that they turn to pornography instead in order to satisfy their deviance. This pornography can only be produced by abusing children.

THAT is why there can be no leeway, no acceptance, no "sympathy". I can sympathize with someone who fights against the urges, just like I can sympathize with the gambling addict who finds it hard to resist or the cigarette smoker who is trying to cut down or the alcoholic who wants to drink less. But sympathizing with the gambler doesn't mean I sympathize that they made their family homeless to satisfy their addiction. It doesn't mean I sympathize with the smoker who gets lung cancer. It doesn't mean I sympathize with the alcoholic who kills a pedestrian during a drunken late-night joyride.

Along those same lines, I cannot sympathize with someone who gives in and indulges their urges. It is a line that cannot be crossed because -- although the person with child porn did not do it themselves -- they are enabling a black market that literally rapes kids and trades them like cattle.

 

[DGrayson]

I worry that so many people in the entertainment industry are pedophiles that more and more will be caught and cause the public to become immune to hating these crimes. The more common place something becomes, the more it blends into the background of society and gets lost in the noise. With the LGBTQ community now embracing pedophiles as part of their group, there will be more children hurt and the left will not blink an eye at the issue due to everyone being "equal". Soon, calling someone a pedophile will be considered an intolerable insult because you are not allowing them to fondle your children. The left is already pushing this and it is getting worse.

I'm sorry can you cite evidence for this? If not please edit your post.

 

[KevinKeene]

Not always the case. It's easy to say "I never wanted this" but what decisions did they make and what content did they avoid to help them with their illness?

Pedophelia and porn go hand-in-hand. It is true that many pedophiles never abuse a child. But the huge elephant in the room -- and the subject matter of this criminal's activity -- is that they turn to pornography instead in order to satisfy their deviance. This pornography can only be produced by abusing children.

THAT is why there can be no leeway, no acceptance, no "sympathy". I can sympathize with someone who fights against the urges, just like I can sympathize with the gambling addict who finds it hard to resist or the cigarette smoker who is trying to cut down or the alcoholic who wants to drink less. But sympathizing with the gambler doesn't mean I sympathize that they made their family homeless to satisfy their addiction. It doesn't mean I sympathize with the smoker who gets lung cancer. It doesn't mean I sympathize with the alcoholic who kills a pedestrian during a drunken late-night joyride.

Along those same lines, I cannot sympathize with someone who gives in and indulges their urges. It is a line that cannot be crossed because -- although the person with child porn did not do it themselves -- they are enabling a black market that literally rapes kids and trades them like cattle.

Pedophiles aren't 'fighting urges'. Aside of their sexual attraction (that is classified as a mental illness for societal reasons), pedophiles are perfectly normal people. They're not constantly thinking about having sex with children, they're not ready to jump the next child they see. Watch Dunki's video to see for yourself, it's a good video.

The only people with uncontrollable urges are sick people - which exist equally in any group of people. The number of adult men raping adult women is probably vastly higher in when comparing %.

 

[Dunki]

This pornography can only be produced by abusing children.

THAT is why there can be no leeway, no acceptance, no "sympathy". I can sympathize with someone who fights against the urges, just like I can sympathize with the gambling addict who finds it hard to resist or the cigarette smoker who is trying to cut down or the alcoholic who wants to drink less. But sympathizing with the gambler doesn't mean I sympathize that they made their family homeless to satisfy their addiction. It doesn't mean I sympathize with the smoker who gets lung cancer. It doesn't mean I sympathize with the alcoholic who kills a pedestrian during a drunken late-night joyride.Along those same lines, I cannot sympathize with someone who gives in and indulges their urges. It is a line that cannot be crossed because -- although the person with child porn did not do it themselves -- they are enabling a black market that literally rapes kids and trades them like cattle.

First of all this is not true. You can clearly urge their needs with fantasy like porn. Japan does this for example a lot. with Loli and Shotacon porn. Also there can be comics. video games etc. Al this does not hurt real children at all. Also your smoking part is not comparable because you chose to smoke. Smoking is a choice nothing else.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Asexual, Intersex, and possibly more...but I find it hard to believe that "Pedosexual" will ever be an accepted letter in the group. Also, this "slippery slope" talk is highly upsetting.

Asexuals aren't a orientation friend.

 

[Bryank75]

28 months for peddling child pornography? That seems really light for such a serious crime. I know he is in his mid fifties, but damn.

He’s probably a liberal, if he had conservative views, they would just execute him on the spot. Then if questioned, if it was justified.... “he was a nazi”.

 

[Ailynn]

Asexuals aren't a orientation friend.

Neither is Transgender.

 

[Ailynn]

Asexuals aren't a orientation friend.

I wanted to edit my response, but apparently the option isn't there. Asexuality is the lack of sexual attraction. Transgender and Intersex are also not sexual orientations, yet they are still included in the LGBT+ group.

It isn't strictly about sexuality, which some people have taken issue with.

 

[Ulysses 31]

I wanted to edit my response, but apparently the option isn't there. Asexuality is the lack of sexual attraction. Transgender and Intersex are also not sexual orientations, yet they are still included in the LGBT+ group.

It isn't strictly about sexuality, which some people have taken issue with.

I think only members can edit their posts.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

I wanted to edit my response, but apparently the option isn't there. Asexuality is the lack of sexual attraction. Transgender and Intersex are also not sexual orientations, yet they are still included in the LGBT+ group.

It isn't strictly about sexuality, which some people have taken issue with.

I don't care or take issue with it but I had no idea about this.

 

[Cybrwzrd]

This is a tough subject to approach objectively.

It is important though that the meaning of the word reverts to what it actually is. If you find a post-pubescent person attractive you literally aren't a pedophile, even if they are 15, 16 or 17. Most people become sexually active during those years. Just a few generations back, that is when people started making families. Acting on it is wrong if you are too old from modern society's perspective, but evolutionary biology makes us seek out the most fertile of mates at a deep lizard brain level.

If you are looking at a 6 year old though and and thinking about sex, you are defective. Something isn't firing right in your brain. Seek help, but from what I understand it is not something that can be treated with high reliability. If you act on it even once though, there shouldn't be any chance of redemption. Bury them under the jail.

I have a theory that blurring the line between childhood and young adulthood like we have over the past few generations has helped to aggravate this problem, but I can't really spell it out. I am not saying some old creep is within his or her right to chase teenagers, so don't misunderstand me. The half your age plus 7 rule seems to be the best method of determining acceptable age spread.

On a tangent - One of my co-workers has a 22 year old daughter who acts like she is about 15, but my co-worker reinforces this behavior by treating her like she is 15, and even calls her baby. Every little problem this young woman faces requires a call to mommy to resolve it. At 22 years of age. My co-worker wants her daughter to be a child still.

 

[guggnichso]

It's a disease, he cant help it.... /s

While I get what you want to say with that and I absolutely agree that handwaving actual pedophilia is a catastrophic failure, I absolutely also believe that pedophilia IS a disease and I also believe we should provide easy access for pedophiles to therapy with as little hurdles as possible to prevent them from becoming active.

Jailing them away after they did something is definitely needed, but then there’s already victims. We should provide closely supervised therapy for them before they become active, so we can diffuse those ticking time bombs BEFORE there is a victim.

So basically society should be proactive, not reactive in this case.

 

[FireEmoji]

I thought maybe I had pedophilia once but it turned out it was just a rash.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

This is a tough subject to approach objectively.

It is important though that the meaning of the word reverts to what it actually is. If you find a post-pubescent person attractive you literally aren't a pedophile, even if they are 15, 16 or 17. Most people become sexually active during those years. Just a few generations back, that is when people started making families. Acting on it is wrong if you are too old from modern society's perspective, but evolutionary biology makes us seek out the most fertile of mates at a deep lizard brain level.

Man teens are horrible why would you want to fuck em?

 

[Cybrwzrd]

Man teens are horrible why would you want to fuck em?

That literally isn't what I said.

 

[mantidor]

Urrgh not this again.

Sexual orientation is about gender, it is by definition.

Pedophilia is a deviation, and it's grouped with other paraphilias, again by definition. If you want to be strict pedophiles can be heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual, literature says most of them would be bisexuals since sexual dimorphism in children is very small.

 

[oagboghi2]

It is not an orientation. It is a mental disorder or mental illness and that we should treat these people like they have a problem and that they need professional help. Making them look like a monster is not the right way to do it.

yes it is.vilifying shameful behavior is exactly how you suppress similar behavior in the future.

Treat pedophilia just like being homosexual, and you will see more pedophilia expressed positively in public.

While I get what you want to say with that and I absolutely agree that handwaving actual pedophilia is a catastrophic failure, I absolutely also believe that pedophilia IS a disease and I also believe we should provide easy access for pedophiles to therapy with as little hurdles as possible to prevent them from becoming active.

Jailing them away after they did something is definitely needed, but then there’s already victims. We should provide closely supervised therapy for them before they become active, so we can diffuse those ticking time bombs BEFORE there is a victim.

So basically society should be proactive, not reactive in this case.

pedophilia IS NOT a disease, and the idea that we should give free medical aid to pedos becuase they can't control themselves is insane.
This is what happens when people can only see themselves and others a victim of...something

 

[Marshmallow]

.

So that's what Gaf come about. Comparing two consenting adults to pedophilia.

But if you want to be coy, the right has been supporting pedophilia since the catholic church (Or most religion) inception. They vote and support an organization that literally shield pedophiles when they get caught.

Treat pedophilia just like being homosexual, and you will see more pedophilia expressed positively in public.

This will never happen. A child will never be considered the same as an adult.

 

[oagboghi2]

This will never happen. A child will never be considered the same as an adult.

Parents will never give their kids hormone blockers or celebrate underage cross dressing. Never say never

 

[infinitys_7th]

Everything about that is wrong. No reason and logic? So pedophilia just happens because ... of the devil? Go read up on psychology, since you won't listen to what I'd say.

And why should we not not accept innocent, peaceful people? You're already doing it! Read the BBC-link I cited. Are you afraid to educate yourself on an uncomfortable topic or do you think the BBC is lying? If neither of these, you should understand why stigmatizing pedophiles makes no sense.



Only if anyone who says stuff like yours isn't human, because the lack of empathy is frightening.

Isn't this like saying we shouldn't stigmatize serial killing because "They just can't help it!"?

Granted, I feel genuinely sorry for pedophiles who don't act on it, and I would feel sorry for someone with a compulsive need to kill who controlled themselves, but how they want to live is not normal or right.

 

[Marshmallow]

Parents will never give their kids hormone blockers or celebrate underage cross dressing. Never say never

Not even remotely the same thing. The fact you think it will happen says more about than anything.

Also "underage crossdressing", what is it even?

 

[ILLtown]

Pedophiles aren't 'fighting urges'. Aside of their sexual attraction (that is classified as a mental illness for societal reasons), pedophiles are perfectly normal people.

I can't prove you wrong, but I'm just not buying what you're saying.

If they're not fighting urges, why would any of them ever sexually abuse children or download child porn, given that they know there's incredibly serious consequences if they get caught doing so?

I'm attracted to adult women. If I was told that I could never have sex with an adult woman again and that all porn featuring adult women was now banned, I'd be fighting urges.

Also, some of the slippery slope arguments in here are nonsense. The reason why paedophilia is abhorrent is because a child can't consent to having sex. They're being taken advantage of by default. You can't say the same about any kind of sex involving consenting adults, whether they're gay, straight, trans or whatever.

I feel sorry for paedophiles that have never acted on their urges, but the problem is, I could never trust one. The fact that some paedophiles DO act on their urges means that I'm going to assume that any paedophile is capable of doing that, therefore I wouldn't want one anywhere near my kids or anyone else's for that matter. That kinda leaves them trapped in a bad place until the day we find some kind of cure, and that's if we ever can, but it's a matter of priorities and keeping children safe is always number 1.

 

[KevinKeene]

yes it is.vilifying shameful behavior is exactly how you suppress similar behavior in the future.

Treat pedophilia just like being homosexual, and you will see more pedophilia expressed positively in public.


pedophilia IS NOT a disease, and the idea that we should give free medical aid to pedos becuase they can't control themselves is insane.
This is what happens when people can only see themselves and others a victim of...something

Any discussion about pedophiles is always frustrating because of people like you. You ignore what others wrote, because it actually explains well why you're wrong, and your entire argument boils down to an emotional appeal in the manner of 'won't somebody think of the children?!'.

Despite your dismissiveness (and don't think you can accuse me of being dismissive: I'm arguing in favor of people beimg able to lead a peaceful life - I get to be dismissive of views that go counter that), I'll give you another quick rundown of why you're wrong. Most of it can be found in the BBC article I linked earlier:

- pedophiles are no small niche. There's probably more pedophiles on earth than transgender people. Therefore treating so many people as monster simply makes no sense. It's something that must be tackled empathetically and humanely.

- pedophiles don't have an uncontrollable urge to rape children. There happen to be a few pedophiles who commit, just like there are a few men who commit rape against adult women.

- You won't find a study about that, though, because the only pedophiles you hear about are the rapists - those get caught by police. The vast majority of non-criminal pedophiles hides. Because they know how people like you would treat them.

- It is the year 2018. Can we, for a moment, realize that NOBODY should be stigmatized? Stigmas are synonymous for prejudice, and that's exactly what you're doing: in your head, all pedophiles are raping monsters. By perpetuating that idea, you keep pedophiles from being able to live in peace.

- Consequently, because you're forcing them into hiding, the criminal ones get opportunities to get close to children. If pedophiles could be open about their status, one could reasonably say 'alright, you're a fine guy, but we hope you understand we cannot employ a pedophile at an elementary school' - 'oh, I absolutely understand. Do you maybe have an open position as a university teacher?' - 'Let me see: ah, yes. Have a look.' And so on. That'd be a positive future. One where less children are raped, because there's less pressure.

- Very important: NOBODY is advocating that sex with children should become legal. Accepting pedophiles for who they are also is NOT a 'slippery road', because 'no sex with children' is a fixed, hard coded rule in western society. Implying that there's any way this could change when pedophiles are no longer demonized is, quite frankly, horse shit. Our entire western civilization has to break down before any government campaigns for sex with children. I could see something like that happen in Turkey, though, because of Erdogan's national deconstruction of western values. But in functioning western countries? Never ever. This is concern trolling, no more.

- Just to cite the BBC-article and Dunki: Between 0.5 and 5% of all people are pedophiles, people who are attracted to prepubescent children. Chances are some of your friends, colleagues or family members are pedophiles. You know these people. Are they monsters? I assume no. So stop projecting your worst fantasies on millions of innocent civilians.

- Why I'm going to such lengths to explain this: Because I hate to see injustice taking place before my eyes. It's why I've been repeatedly defending rightwing users against the auth-left, even though I'm politically left myself. But justice is important. It should be to everyone.

 

[KevinKeene]

I can't prove you wrong, but I'm just not buying what you're saying.

If they're not fighting urges, why would any of them ever sexually abuse children or download child porn, given that they know there's incredibly serious consequences if they get caught doing so?

I'm attracted to adult women. If I was told that I could never have sex with an adult woman again and that all porn featuring adult women was now banned, I'd be fighting urges.

I was a male virgin until earlier this year, and I'm 32. I would have liked sex, but I NEVER had to 'fight urges'. I just fapped. And I fapped a lot. But never ever did it cross my mind to rape a woman.

 

[ILLtown]

I was a male virgin until earlier this year, and I'm 32. I would have liked sex, but I NEVER had to 'fight urges'. I just fapped. And I fapped a lot. But never ever did it cross my mind to rape a woman.

Why not answer my question then? I'll repeat it again: -

If they're not fighting urges, why would any of them ever sexually abuse children or download child porn, given that they know there's incredibly serious consequences if they get caught doing so?

 

[KevinKeene]

Why not answer my question then? I'll repeat it again: -

If they're not fighting urges, why would any of them ever sexually abuse children or download child porn, given that they know there's incredibly serious consequences if they get caught doing so?

Why do non-pedophile rapists rape?

 

[ILLtown]

Why do non-pedophile rapists rape?

I realise that the question I asked is inconvenient to your narrative, but that's why you should try and answer it.

 

[KevinKeene]

I realise that the question I asked is inconvenient to your narrative, but that's why you should try and answer it.

Instead of demanding answers, you could just start reading what people wrote already:

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/anim...rrested-for-child-porn.1464242/post-253366794

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

You have put a lot of thought into it and -- though we disagree fundamentally -- I'd like to respond in kind KevinKeene

Any discussion about pedophiles is always frustrating because of people like you. You ignore what others wrote, because it actually explains well why you're wrong, and your entire argument boils down to an emotional appeal in the manner of 'won't somebody think of the children?!'.

Highly disingenuous, especially that last part. But I guess your entire argument boils down to an emotional appeal in the manner of "won't somebody think of the pedos?"! No? That's not what you're saying? Then don't toss it around casually.

Despite your dismissiveness (and don't think you can accuse me of being dismissive: I'm arguing in favor of people beimg able to lead a peaceful life - I get to be dismissive of views that go counter that), I'll give you another quick rundown of why you're wrong. Most of it can be found in the BBC article I linked earlier:

- pedophiles are no small niche. There's probably more pedophiles on earth than transgender people. Therefore treating so many people as monster simply makes no sense. It's something that must be tackled empathetically and humanely.

Treating a condition as "monstrous" is a different matter than treating individual people as "monstrous". The actions, desires, thoughts, urges, etc should always be vilified without exception. Not to put too fine of a point on it, but it is a basic animal instinct to protect our own young. You can treat people who come forward humanely. Curious if that is the current situation, though, because from my perspective we have rampant child abuse, pornography, normalization, and exploitation.

What's also curious is this is coming from Left-leaning groups who have no problem mocking "white fragility" or "male fragility" when they are asked to exercise the same empathy.

I. Don't. Fucking. Buy. It. It's an insulting double-standard and I will stand here insisting "you first" when it comes to treating people humanely. Not "you" as in KevinKeene, of course, but the movement in general. You can act however you choose, I suppose.

- pedophiles don't have an uncontrollable urge to rape children. There happen to be a few pedophiles who commit, just like there are a few men who commit rape against adult women.

They have the urge (or let's just call it 'desire' if that sits better with you) to have sex with children. It is a deviant desire and should always be viewed as such. Sometimes I've had the urge (or let's just call it 'desire') to yank the wheel and plow into a concrete pillar. Life is cruel and unfortunately you don't get a gold star for resisting every urge, but nonetheless it is asked of us in a variety of ways.

- You won't find a study about that, though, because the only pedophiles you hear about are the rapists - those get caught by police. The vast majority of non-criminal pedophiles hides. Because they know how people like you would treat them.

We do have some knowledge about pedophelia concerning how it is passed down in families due to abuse from the parents or relatives. The pedophile is often not merely hiding from their own desires but also from acknowledging the abuse they suffered in the past. The statistics on this are perfectly clear.

Fundamentally, they are making the decision to hide. It is a choice. Any one of them can say "damn the torpedos" and come out asking for help but as you pointed out it is not often done for obvious reasons.

In a society where we openly ask for "white people" and "males" to exercise bravery and humility for simply being born white or male, I see no problem expecting a fraction of that from people who fantasize about abusing a child.

- It is the year 2018. Can we, for a moment, realize that NOBODY should be stigmatized? Stigmas are synonymous for prejudice, and that's exactly what you're doing: in your head, all pedophiles are raping monsters. By perpetuating that idea, you keep pedophiles from being able to live in peace.

Why should nobody be stigmatized? Sure, I agree that stigma shouldn't be used as a weapon, but shame and stigma are a valuable social tool.

Pedophiles already don't "live in peace" when they don't acknowledge their mental deviance and seek help to address it.

- Consequently, because you're forcing them into hiding, the criminal ones get opportunities to get close to children. If pedophiles could be open about their status, one could reasonably say 'alright, you're a fine guy, but we hope you understand we cannot employ a pedophile at an elementary school' - 'oh, I absolutely understand. Do you maybe have an open position as a university teacher?' - 'Let me see: ah, yes. Have a look.' And so on. That'd be a positive future. One where less children are raped, because there's less pressure.

Hopeful outlook. In the meanwhile, the focus should be on the children who are raped. Adults can make the conscious choice to not act on their behaviors.

- Very important: NOBODY is advocating that sex with children should become legal. Accepting pedophiles for who they are also is NOT a 'slippery road', because 'no sex with children' is a fixed, hard coded rule in western society. Implying that there's any way this could change when pedophiles are no longer demonized is, quite frankly, horse shit. Our entire western civilization has to break down before any government campaigns for sex with children. I could see something like that happen in Turkey, though, because of Erdogan's national deconstruction of western values. But in functioning western countries? Never ever. This is concern trolling, no more.

I don't advocate for a "thought police", but that's not what is being discussed here. Society has every right to shame and ostracize elements of itself that are unhealthy. Some people have a problem with this because they equate "society" with "The Gov't" or something along those lines.

Let me ask you this straight-up: if a person is thinking pedophilic thoughts about sex with children, should they be told that the thoughts are acceptable or unacceptable? You can throw around words like "demonize" but at the end of the day it's really just a simple matter. Are the thoughts appropriate or not?

And to be clear, I'm not asking you if the thoughts make them guilty. Those are two separate concerns.

Are pedophilic thoughts acceptable?

- Just to cite the BBC-article and Dunki: Between 0.5 and 5% of all people are pedophiles, people who are attracted to prepubescent children. Chances are some of your friends, colleagues or family members are pedophiles. You know these people. Are they monsters? I assume no. So stop projecting your worst fantasies on millions of innocent civilians.

Again, you are conflating two different things: we don't budge one inch on classifying a thought as "monstrous" and we can do so without condemning the whole person. In the same way that an otherwise-normal person might express suicidal thoughts and be told "Wow! No way is that a healthy way to think about things. Please, is there a way I can help or someone you can reach out to for counseling?" we should not be budging on the monstrous nature of pedophilia.

- Why I'm going to such lengths to explain this: Because I hate to see injustice taking place before my eyes. It's why I've been repeatedly defending rightwing users against the auth-left, even though I'm politically left myself. But justice is important. It should be to everyone.

Children being exploited and raped, ruining their lives and setting themselves up to repeat it to their spouses, children, relatives, and strangers is pretty darn unjust. No one is thought-policing potential pedophiles and yanking them out of their homes and lynching them. No one is rampaging through children's TV shows and mass-firing content creators for questionable content. No one is stringing up politicians for awkwardly hugging a 9-year-old. Justice is not being denied when members of a society stand up and say "get fucked, Pedos, and never touch our children" as a warning to anyone who chooses to act on their impulses.

 

[Mihos]

Normal > Bi > Gay > Trans > "gender spectrum" > Pedosexual.

Where on this slippery slop are we currently up to?

The difference is one of these labels has a victim.

 

[ILLtown]

Instead of demanding answers, you could just start reading what people wrote already:

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/anim...rrested-for-child-porn.1464242/post-253366794

That doesn't answer the question though, and I don't think it can be compared to adult rape.

A paedophile can't legally have sex with a member of the group that they find attractive, nor can they legally watch the type of porn they'd like to watch. EVER. I'm no expert on the mentality of rapists, but a rapist could have legal sex with a member of the group they find attractive and they can legally watch adult porn too, so I don't think rapists rape for the same reasons that paedophiles act on their urges.

 

[oagboghi2]

Any discussion about pedophiles is always frustrating because of people like you. You ignore what others wrote, because it actually explains well why you're wrong, and your entire argument boils down to an emotional appeal in the manner of 'won't somebody think of the children?!'.

Despite your dismissiveness (and don't think you can accuse me of being dismissive: I'm arguing in favor of people beimg able to lead a peaceful life - I get to be dismissive of views that go counter that), I'll give you another quick rundown of why you're wrong. Most of it can be found in the BBC article I linked earlier:

No, you're just acting silly crying over pedophilies.
Those poor unfortunate souls

- pedophiles are no small niche. There's probably more pedophiles on earth than transgender people. Therefore treating so many people as monster simply makes no sense. It's something that must be tackled empathetically and humanely.

Yes they are. So are transgender people by the way. This "everyone is a pedo." excuse is laughable and also irrelevant. People don't dislike pedos becuase they are a minority

- pedophiles don't have an uncontrollable urge to rape children. There happen to be a few pedophiles who commit, just like there are a few men who commit rape against adult women.

They have a sexual attraction to children which is why people dislike them. You invented this "uncontrollable rage" nonsense to so you wouldn't have to deal with why people dislike pedos

- You won't find a study about that, though, because the only pedophiles you hear about are the rapists - those get caught by police. The vast majority of non-criminal pedophiles hides. Because they know how people like you would treat them.

Yeah how dare people be concerned about people who commit crime.

The vast majority of non-criminal pedos hide...and...your point is? Am I supposed to shed tears over that?

sexual attraction to children is considered taboo. People tend to hide taboo's. Shaming and ostracizing is another way for society to deal with bad ideas. Publicly admitting sexual attraction to children...bad idea.

- It is the year 2018. Can we, for a moment, realize that NOBODY should be stigmatized? Stigmas are synonymous for prejudice, and that's exactly what you're doing: in your head, all pedophiles are raping monsters. By perpetuating that idea, you keep pedophiles from being able to live in peace.

No, becuase that is a stupid way to look at the world. Some things are bad and should be stigmatized.

Seriously do you hear yourself.
"It's 2018 guys, why can't we just like, be okay with sharing child porn pictures and fantasizing about fucking children. Don't be a square"

- Consequently, because you're forcing them into hiding, the criminal ones get opportunities to get close to children. If pedophiles could be open about their status, one could reasonably say 'alright, you're a fine guy, but we hope you understand we cannot employ a pedophile at an elementary school' - 'oh, I absolutely understand. Do you maybe have an open position as a university teacher?' - 'Let me see: ah, yes. Have a look.' And so on. That'd be a positive future. One where less children are raped, because there's less pressure.

....Or they will just continue to lie, get the teacher position they want and fuck the kid they want. Your logic makes no sense. What kind of bizarre fantasy roleplay is this.

- Very important: NOBODY is advocating that sex with children should become legal. Accepting pedophiles for who they are also is NOT a 'slippery road', because 'no sex with children' is a fixed, hard coded rule in western society. Implying that there's any way this could change when pedophiles are no longer demonized is, quite frankly, horse shit. Our entire western civilization has to break down before any government campaigns for sex with children. I could see something like that happen in Turkey, though, because of Erdogan's national deconstruction of western values. But in functioning western countries? Never ever. This is concern trolling, no more.

No you just want to give them state subsidized therapy and decriminalize child porn. Accoding to this thread so far, that is considered progress.

40 years ago demanding the state pay for a surgery to mutilate your body and become the opposite sex would have gotten you laughed out of the room. No I believe in the slippery slope, becuase as this thread illustrates, there will always be some fool who says
" Guys, it 20XX, stop stigmatizing. Of course we can lower he age of consent a few years.

- Just to cite the BBC-article and Dunki: Between 0.5 and 5% of all people are pedophiles, people who are attracted to prepubescent children. Chances are some of your friends, colleagues or family members are pedophiles. You know these people. Are they monsters? I assume no. So stop projecting your worst fantasies on millions of innocent civilians.

And they should keep that to themselves and their therapist. The rest of society(95% - 99%) don't have time for their fucked up fantasies

- Why I'm going to such lengths to explain this: Because I hate to see injustice taking place before my eyes. It's why I've been repeatedly defending rightwing users against the auth-left, even though I'm politically left myself. But justice is important. It should be to everyone.

Injustice? Have you made a single post about the children in these pictures this guy was peddling? Where the hell did he get get them? Are those kids alright? Seems like your justice is very selective.

This guy broke the law. A law that is incredibly easy to not break. He is not a victim

 

[Nymphae]

Asexual, Intersex, and possibly more...but I find it hard to believe that "Pedosexual" will ever be an accepted letter in the group.

Not 15 years ago people said the same thing about mass gay and trans acceptance. We'll see what happens.

 

[Marshmallow]

Not 15 years ago people said the same thing about mass gay and trans acceptance. We'll see what happens.

So in your opinion gay people should never have tried to be accepted? Should have been content with not having rights and getting beaten/tortured?

Also, I find your fixation with fucking children fucking weird. Like it seems like "people will have sex with children" is the first answer you come up in any scenario in which minorities try to gain acceptance.

 

[Nymphae]

Also, I find your fixation with fucking children fucking weird. Like it seems like "people will have sex with children" is the first answer you come up in any scenario in which minorities try to gain acceptance.

I think you have me confused with another forum member lol?

 

[Dunki]

yes it is.vilifying shameful behavior is exactly how you suppress similar behavior in the future.

Treat pedophilia just like being homosexual, and you will see more pedophilia expressed positively in public.

This is bullshit. The thing is the less stigmatized it is and the more it is treated as a mental disorder illness the more people will go seek help. If you villainize it people are scared to even try to seek help and they try to supress their desires in a non professional way which can much easier leed to sexual assault of children etc.

Again I do not want to normalize it. I just want it to be not villainize it. There is a middleground we should reach to help not only people with pedophilia but also to try to get as less victims as possible.

 

[Marshmallow]

I think you have me confused with another forum member lol?

You literally just posted:

Not 15 years ago people said the same thing about mass gay and trans acceptance. We'll see what happens.

"Two adults want to get married, they are no different from straight people except they are of the same sex... but they shouldn't, because it will lead to people legally fucking children" The irony is that there are countries around the globes in which people can marry children, and they are not exactly kind to LGBT:

Are these people part of the "straight community"? Does it mean every straight person supports pedophilia?

/s

 

[oagboghi2]

This is bullshit. The thing is the less stigmatized it is and the more it is treated as a mental disorder illness the more people will go seek help. If you villainize it people are scared to even try to seek help and they try to supress their desires in a non professional way which can much easier leed to sexual assault of children etc.

Again I do not want to normalize it. I just want it to be not villainize it. There is a middleground we should reach to help not only people with pedophilia but also to try to get as less victims as possible.

Go to seek help...for what? This is not a drug condition. You can live a completely normal life as long as you don't break the law.

It's funny, you guys are crying about how unfairly they are being treated, but here you are talking about them as if they are coke fiends going through withdrawal.

If these people are "born this way", born with this sexual desire, than treatment for them will be just as effective as treatment for a homosexual...which is effectively worthless.

 

[Moneal]

Its odd that people don't realize that pedophilia behavior has been culturally acceptable for the vast majority of human history. Just 140 years ago the age of consent in the US was 10-12 depending on the state, with the exception of Delaware which had an age of consent of 7. It wasn't until the 1920s that the shift really began.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Its odd that people don't realize that pedophilia behavior has been culturally acceptable for the vast majority of human history. Just 140 years ago the age of consent in the US was 10-12 depending on the state, with the exception of Delaware which had an age of consent of 7. It wasn't until the 1920s that the shift really began.

So were slavery, polygamy, and rigid caste systems. Your point?

 

[Dunki]

Go to seek help...for what? This is not a drug condition. You can live a completely normal life as long as you don't break the law.

It's funny, you guys are crying about how unfairly they are being treated, but here you are talking about them as if they are coke fiends going through withdrawal.

If these people are "born this way", born with this sexual desire, than treatment for them will be just as effective as treatment for a homosexual...which is effectively worthless.

First of all. They will never live a normal life. But to do this without prof counseling it will be also dangerous for other people in this case Children.. Do you even know how bad it can back fire if you have to supress your sexual desires your whole life knowing that its bad etc? The less help these people get the bigger the chance that they can not endure the sexual pressure and acting on it etc. There are some people who can not even endure to not masturbate for a whole week imagine this is basically it for the rest of your life.

 

[Moneal]

So were slavery, polygamy, and rigid caste systems. Your point?

Expecting them to disappear in just a short time. There are biological and evolutionary reasons that they exist as well. Polygamy and pedophilia have similar evolutionary benefits of producing more potential offspring, which is probably why they are so commonly practiced together.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Expecting them to disappear in just a short time. There are biological and evolutionary reasons that they exist as well. Polygamy and pedophilia have similar evolutionary benefits of producing more potential offspring, which is probably why they are so commonly practiced together.

To be clear, sex with pre-pubescent children has been considered abnormal since as far back as the Greeks and Romans. I am not trying to claim that "18 years = adult" is a universal standard, but pre-pubescent pretty much is. I am open to hearing about cultures where pre-pubescent pedophelia (which is -- personally -- the issue I am more concerned about) was considered acceptable. I am not aware of that.

We also have to consider that the sexual practices of women was the primary focus of humanity's ancient guidelines and practices. This leaves some unanswered questions when it comes to how was homosexual sex with boys viewed; I am not aware of many cultures where that was openly promoted or accepted.