Support NeoGAF

[Mammoth Jones]

And it's genetic. So tough luck?

Proof?

 

[Irminsul]

Proof?

From Wikipedia:

"Pedophilia can be described as a disorder of sexual preference, phenomenologically similar to a heterosexual or homosexual sexual orientation because it emerges before or during puberty, and because it is stable over time. These observations, however, do not exclude pedophilia from the group of mental disorders because pedophilic acts cause harm, and pedophiles can sometimes be helped by mental health professionals to refrain from acting on their impulses."

 

[Mammoth Jones]

So what exactly is the difference between you wanting to ban and sentence people for drawings and all the other people that want to ban random stuff? What kind of argument do you have now against for example jack thompson or any other old fart that wants to ban violent video games, movies (to many to count), music, porn (look barely 18 in a school girl outfit), books (Lolita) and a bunch of other stuff that routinely crosses the line from acceptable into disgusting and is constantly blamed in the media?

If you don't see the difference between social acceptable violent media w/ random outliers like jack Thompson crusading against them and pedophiles jerking off to kiddie porn then I really don't have anything to say that is going to alter your world view.

Being disgusting isn't the issue. Pedophiles distributing images real or "inspired" images of naked children is. It's a serious and dangerous activity that society should not accept on any detectable level.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

From Wikipedia:

"Pedophilia can be described as a disorder of sexual preference, phenomenologically similar to a heterosexual or homosexual sexual orientation because it emerges before or during puberty, and because it is stable over time. These observations, however, do not exclude pedophilia from the group of mental disorders because pedophilic acts cause harm, and pedophiles can sometimes be helped by mental health professionals to refrain from acting on their impulses."

What part of that states it's directly cause by genetics?

 

[Irminsul]

Well, for that you best look at what generally influences sexual orientation, and it's mostly genetics.

 

[childplease]

Im surprised no one posted this yet.



Japanese govt being the Japanese govt. We got a ton of other more important shit to worry about that doodles digital or on paper. Guess they gotta keep dem aging voters happy, since they are the only fucksticks who keep putting these idiots back in office again and again and again.

I would say Social Engineering is an important aspect of government.

I mean what government wishes to have a bunch of 30 something weirdos who watch weird kinky cartoons that depict kids?

 

[JustRiffled]

You mean Tsutomu Miyazaki? The stuff he had (well, some of it) was anime (not necessarily hentai) and slasher films, not child porn (with the possible exception of the videos of the victims he took himself; I don't know the nature of those). He also had a huge video collection of which only some stuff was anime or slasher films.

Hmm...I guess so. They were only like 8 hentais by 1989 (all of which extremly harmless, but some still had Loli)

 

[meltingparappa]

Here's a shallow but relatively informative transcription from "Savage Love" featuring a psychiatrist talking about ACTUAL pedophiles attempting to be a normal member of society, rather than spiral into an ostracized self-hate that ends in either crime or suicide.

The thought that anyone could equate "kinky cartoons" with so complicated and difficult an issue with the potential to harm actual children is stomach churning.

 

[oneils]

Here's a shallow but relatively informative transcription from "Savage Love" featuring a psychiatrist talking about ACTUAL pedophiles attempting to be a normal member of society, rather than spiral into an ostracized self-hate that ends in either crime or suicide.

The thought that anyone could equate "kinky cartoons" with so complicated and difficult an issue with the potential to harm actual children is stomach churning.

If pedophiles want to be accepted by society they probably shouldn't be publicly whining about the banning of their virtual child porn. They really should be seeking therapy from a professional, explaining their orientation and how they can control their impulses.

Explaining to the public that the use of virtual child porn is part of how they control their impulses ( by actually giving into them) is not really practical.

 

[meltingparappa]

If pedophiles want to be accepted by society they probably shouldn't be publicly whining about the banning of their virtual child porn. They really should be seeking therapy from a professional, explaining their orientation and how they can control their impulses.

Explaining to the public that the use of virtual child porn is part of how they control their impulses ( by actually giving into them) is not really practical.

Did you even bother to read the article?

 

[Kinyou]

Maybe they should uncensor their porn again. Isn't that what drove japans adult industry into those fetish territories in the first place?

 

[oneils]

Did you even bother to read the article?

I was responding to this (and other posts like it):

The thought that anyone could equate "kinky cartoons" with so complicated and difficult an issue with the potential to harm actual children is stomach churning.

 

[meltingparappa]

I was responding to this (and other posts like it):

My point was that lolicon and its fans have about as much to do with ACTUAL pedophilia as videogames have to do with mass shootings, especially if the latter involves congenital psychopathy.

Equating the two, especially politically, due to personal levels of discomfort is utterly ineffective to an actual complicated issue with actual victims.

 

[oneils]

My point was that lolicon and its fans have about as much to do with ACTUAL pedophilia as videogames have to do with mass shootings, especially if the latter involves congenital psychopathy.

Equating the two, especially politically, due to personal levels of discomfort is utterly ineffective to an actual complicated issue with actual victims.

Might be, but it is almost impossible to have the discussion. A well known conservative thinker was run out of town when he made similar comments. His comment was:

...I do have some grave doubts about putting people in jail because of their taste in pictures.

CBC commentator fired in child porn firestorm

Faced with that kind of reaction leads me to believe that many people do see them as equivalent. Trying to convince people otherwise seems unlikely. I just can't imagine a lolicon lobby being that popular (at least in my country).

There is probably a better way to explain to people that not all pedophiles are child molesters.

 

[meltingparappa]

Might be, but it is almost impossible to have the discussion. A well known conservative thinker was run out of town when he made similar comments.

He probably didn't quite deserve that, but a gigantic distinction is that pictures of under-aged individuals creates a demand for child porn which encourages a supply of new child-porn from actual children.

Lolicon is victimless and also resembles an actual child about as much as anything else in anime resembles reality.

But it's completely true that it's a difficult enough discussion to have on a message board where everyone is familiar with the conventions of cartoons and modern pop culture. I'm sure randomly bringing this up with a grizzled 60 year local politician will have less than productive results.

 

[JJDinomite]

DON'T FORGET, GUYS! It is completely, 100% scientifically proven that being attracted to your same sex is completely normal. As long as you don't get in someone else's way, it's totally fine.

HOWTHEFUCKEVER, if you are somehow attracted to loli (or any fetish, for that matter), you are a no-good spawn of Satan who deserves to rot in prison for the rest of your miserable life. As long as you don't get in someone else's way, it's totally your choice for what you are sexually attracted to.

Progress, people, progress.

 

[daniels]

If you don't see the difference between social acceptable violent media w/ random outliers like jack Thompson crusading against them and pedophiles jerking off to kiddie porn then I really don't have anything to say that is going to alter your world view.

Being disgusting isn't the issue. Pedophiles distributing images real or "inspired" images of naked children is. It's a serious and dangerous activity that society should not accept on any detectable level.

Do you have any statistics that someone that jerks of to drawings is more likely to rape children ? Or is the whole stuff about danger to society just your way to try and claim the moral high ground? Sounds dangerous, you know hypocritical people claiming the moral high ground that are pro censorship all for the “good” and “safety” of society. Pretty scary stuff I tell you. No matter how many times you write kiddie porn I will not stop mentioning that we are talking about drawings, sentencing people, banning and outlawing drawings. If you don’t know the difference between a drawing and the real thing here is a hint, only one has a victim the other is not real, its a fantasy, a thought and according to you should be punishable by law. Maybe you have a problem differentiating reality and fantasy? I mention again people jerk off to anything from reading Lolita to porn with flat chested woman in schoolgirl uniforms and at the end of the day no one got hurt just like with drawings and violent videogames. As expected you could not provide a single reason why with your line of thinking one thing could and should be banned but not the other.

 

[Chainsawkitten]

Here's a shallow but relatively informative transcription from "Savage Love" featuring a psychiatrist talking about ACTUAL pedophiles attempting to be a normal member of society, rather than spiral into an ostracized self-hate that ends in either crime or suicide.

The thought that anyone could equate "kinky cartoons" with so complicated and difficult an issue with the potential to harm actual children is stomach churning.

I like how the comments are split between either people berating the other commenters for their lack of compassion or people saying pedophiles and homosexuals (even though there was no mention of homosexuality in the article) are sick and should be thrown in jail.

And it's genetic. So tough luck?

I'd hardly say it's genetic. It could be to some degree, but environmental factors seem more important. It isn't a choice though, and that's what really matters.

 

[meltingparappa]

I like how the comments are split between either people berating the other commenters for their lack of compassion or people saying pedophiles and homosexuals (even though there was no mention of homosexuality in the article) are sick and should be thrown in jail.

I'd hardly say it's genetic. It could be to some degree, but environmental factors seem more important. It isn't a choice though, and that's what really matters.

There is sadly no shortage of propaganda groups willing to equate the two.

Also there's a sad statistic somewhere, where children who are molested are more likely to molest others when they are older.

 

[Chainsawkitten]

Also there's a sad statistic somewhere, where children who are molested are more likely to molest others when they are older.

That's exactly what makes me think environmental factors are the major ones. Though it could also be that certain people have certain genetic predisposals to pedo/hebe/ephebophilia and various environmental factors (like childhood abuse) can trigger those dispositions.

And after reading a bit it seems Dan Savage has plenty of ties with the LGBT community so the comments didn't come entirely out of nowhere. Still pretty disgusting, mind.

 

[LightofRohan]

If pedophiles want to be accepted by society they probably shouldn't be publicly whining about the banning of their virtual child porn. They really should be seeking therapy from a professional, explaining their orientation and how they can control their impulses.

Explaining to the public that the use of virtual child porn is part of how they control their impulses ( by actually giving into them) is not really practical.

So, confess these things to a professional who has the right to alert the authorities on this type of subject? Who would put themselves in such a risky position? People have villainized that orientation to such an excessive degree, that people are afraid to even seek help.

And then the only ones you hear about are the child rapists/molestors. So then that parallel is always existing...

DON'T FORGET, GUYS! It is completely, 100% scientifically proven that being attracted to your same sex is completely normal. As long as you don't get in someone else's way, it's totally fine.

HOWTHEFUCKEVER, if you are somehow attracted to loli (or any fetish, for that matter), you are a no-good spawn of Satan who deserves to rot in prison for the rest of your miserable life. As long as you don't get in someone else's way, it's totally your choice for what you are sexually attracted to.

Progress, people, progress.

We can barely reach agreements on homosexuality, this would be a lost cause forever. It's one of the prime topics where people react completely emotionally over logically.

There is sadly no shortage of propaganda groups willing to equate the two.

Also there's a sad statistic somewhere, where children who are molested are more likely to molest others when they are older.

Yes, but that probably is more creating a molestor/rapist in general not a pedophile. They aren't necessarily related.

 

[Chainsawkitten]

Yes, but that probably is more creating a molestor/rapist in general not a pedophile. They aren't necessarily related.

I think one of the major reasons is because it teaches the victim that sexual relations betwen children and adults are not inappropriate (they may see any adult as an authority figure even if they're experiencing harm by their actions) as well as instilling the child which associations between childhood and sex.

It's certainly true that not all (or even the majority) of child molesters are pedophiles. They simply go for the easiest target and children have no way of defending themselves. So even if child molestion may lead to more child molesters, it's not certain that any of those molesters are pedophiles. I think I may have to withdraw my previous statement on that topic where I said that statistic would be evidence against a genetical cause for pedophilia. I'm pretty sure the data was about child molesters and not pedophiles (it's a tricky topic since non-offending pedophiles are very unlikely to show up in statistics due to the social stigma attached to it) so the data didn't actually suggest that previous victims of abuse were more likely to become pedophiles, merely that they were more likely to become molesters.

I'm usually one to make a very clear distinction between the two so I'm ashamed to say I slipped here. I'm still doubtful to ascribe pedophilia or any sexual orientation really to genetics alone. That genes act more like a predisposition to certain orientations seems far more likely to me.