Is Paedophilia Just Another Sexual Preference?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by gfadAlso you cant call a paedophile predatory until they attack someone can you?


if they spend every weekday eating lunch under a tree, across the street from a playground, watching 6 year olds play, he's predatory and dangerous in my mind. Maybe that's because I have kids.




posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
if they spend every weekday eating lunch under a tree, across the street from a playground, watching 6 year olds play, he's predatory and dangerous in my mind. Maybe that's because I have kids.


Ok yeah you are totally right ... what I was trying to say was you cant call them predatory until they act like a predator! As I said earlier I think there are paedophiles who dont offend and hold their urges under the surface by some means, but obviously they have to keep it a secret so we dont know how many of these people exist or even if they do exist.

[edit on 15/9/06 by gfad]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
Im obviously not promoting sex with children and Im not even discussing the act of sex with children Im talking about why people are attracted to them. Paedophilia is a real tangible thing that exists and has to be dealt with. Its the elephant in the room.

I honestly believe that paedophilia just like homosexuality isnt something imparted upon you but something you are born with and cant change. I dont think you can rehabilitate a paedophile just as I believe you cant force a straight person to be attracted to somone of the same sex. These things seem to connect paedophilia with other accepted sexual orientations to me.

This of course means that there are people who are born as paedophiles/sexuals ,and I think, dont act on these urges. They go through there lives never having sex with children, maybe even never having sex at all. We never hear from these people because of their secret, they never get counted.

Imagine that paedophilia is a sexual orientation; perhaps there is a higher proportion of paedosexual rapists (child molesterers) than heterosexual rapists because children are intrinsically more vulnerable, yet there are still paedosexuals who dont abuse children just as there are heterosexuals who arent rapists.

And dont scream consent at me, I know!


I disagree with you, at least partly when you say "paedophilia just like homosexuality isnt something imparted upon you but something you are born with and cant change".

I personlly think that paedophilia is more caused from conditions growing up, sexual abuse, etc. I think that a perfectly normal child could possibly throught some trama as a child alter the Mentality and the way he/she thinks caused by some form abuse, we are somewhat shaped from our surrounding in my personal opinion, but again can possibly be as you said it too, but to completely believe that your born into to it every single time I think is not completely true in alot of circumstances.

Now I'm somewhat going against myself here as I'd said i 'm Homosexual, but was never abused, I dont see the Paralell you are trying to use here. It's not a sexual preference, cause if it was your endorsing this act by giving is just that.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Paraphrased from the American Psychiatric Association - DSM-IV-TR

Pedophilia is a disorder. There are different types of Pedophilia. It is egosyntonic in nature. The disorder usually begins in adolescense although some pedophiles report not beginning until middle age. Pedophilic behavior often fluctuates with psychosocial stress.

My comments - It is NOT a sexual preference. It is a disorder. It is NOT loving. It is preditary; self serving; and VERY damaging to the victims.


Hah. This falls in the thread starter's traps. At one time, homosexuality was listed in the same book. It was obviously a disorder, too. *laughs*

This issue is about consent. An adult can have sex with a 14 year old in Canada and not be a pedophile. Or an adult could have sex with a 16 year old and not be a pedophile -- 18 in Texas. Isn't it obvious that Canadian minors have a much better grasp of sexual acts than children in Texas? This is arbitrary clap trap.



[edit on 15-9-2006 by radardog]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 12:34 PM
link   
I dont think that this is a sexual preference because when 2 people have sex it is consentual, whether your homo, bi or hetero.

BUT when pedophile people do it, they usually kidnap and then rape or just rape and then kill.

How is this EVER going to be accepted?

Not only is this disgusting its SICK. And I think ALL pedophiles are sick.



[edit on 15-9-2006 by sheant143]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by radardog
Hah. This falls in the thread starter's traps. At one time, homosexuality was listed in the same book. It was obviously a disorder, too. *laughs*

Apparently freud wrote a paper on father/daughter molestation saying it was an epidemic [1 in 4?] and he was shouted down and forced to retract it.. then saying [of course] that the victims must have imagined it. I then wondered how many of his peers were actually guilty of it themselves to have such a reaction to it. Many people cndemn middle eastern countries for savagry.. things like clit removal and marrying 9 year olds.. but it seems we have the same type of things lurking in our culture.. it's just done behind closed doors. The very fact that this issue has been brought up in this context shows this.. and apparently the pedos themselves believe that they are being oppressed? This perplexes me.. how could they genuinely believe that they have a relationship with a child yet not see their own predatory behaviour? How could a grown adult not recognise the difference between violation, coersion and consent? Delusional bs.

As for it being an 'orientation'.. are beastiality and rapes orienations too? What about Jack the ripper and other serial killers? Misunderstood perhaps? :shk:

"The intenstines and blood splatters decorating the room is not disturbed.. he's just expressing himself!"


BTW [Community service announcement I guess..]:
If there is anyone reading this thread who is 'attracted' to children [and given the stats it's possible].. please get help.

[edit on 15-9-2006 by riley]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Yes. You absolutley can call something predatory even if they do not act. Any act that contains an aggressor and a victim is predatory by nature. Lacking informed consent there is a victim. Hence predatory.

Also, are there numbers of people coming forward saying "I am a pedophile but have never acted or attempted to act on my desire/compulsion"? (Keeping in mind that child pornography also exploits child victims.)



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jtma508
Yes. You absolutley can call something predatory even if they do not act. Any act that contains an aggressor and a victim is predatory by nature. Lacking informed consent there is a victim. Hence predatory.

Also, are there numbers of people coming forward saying "I am a pedophile but have never acted or attempted to act on my desire/compulsion"? (Keeping in mind that child pornography also exploits child victims.)


Firstly you say that they can be predatory even if they dont act but go on to make your explanation describing the act. You are saying that even if a paedophile never interacted or even saw a child they could still be a predator.

Secondly I already said twice that obviously "non-active" paedophiles have to keep it a secret and cant be counted and I dont even know if they do exist Im just theorising.


Originally posted by riley
but it seems we have the same type of things lurking in our culture.. it's just done behind closed doors. The very fact that this issue has been brought up in this context shows this.. and apparently the pedos themselves believe that they are being oppressed?


By saying this are you implying that I am or actively support child abuse? I definately dont, the point im trying to make is that paedophiles exist and we dont know why and to be quite honest we dont really know how to deal with them.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
By saying this are you implying that I am or actively support child abuse?

No.

I definately dont, the point im trying to make is that paedophiles exist and we dont know why and to be quite honest we dont really know how to deal with them.

They can get therapy and hopefully fix the cause before they hurt someone.. or they can go to jail after the fact. I'm not sure how you think society should proceed?
Simulated pornography would just make them want the real thing.. besides which such therapy would re-inforce and psychologically validate the visual attraction via sexual climax. Why should they be gratified at all? There are plenty of people [both gay and straight] who practice celebacy with no ill effects.. so pedos and rapist can control ther impulses.. they just choose not to.

Come to think of it simulated porn and aversion therapy might be plausable.. though that could mean inflicting physical pain on the pedo [I know that sounds awful but what options are there?]. This is one issue where I think 'the good of society' would trump his human rights. As it is they chemically castrate them.. in a way that violates his human rights but at least he's not violating a kid somewhere instead.

[edit on 15-9-2006 by riley]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by radardog

This issue is about consent. An adult can have sex with a 14 year old in Canada and not be a pedophile. Or an adult could have sex with a 16 year old and not be a pedophile -- 18 in Texas. Isn't it obvious that Canadian minors have a much better grasp of sexual acts than children in Texas? This is arbitrary clap trap.

[edit on 15-9-2006 by radardog]


You are confusing this with hebephilia, wich is primarily an attraction to adolescents. These are arguably two different things.

Riley,
Chemical castration may or may not help. Violent sexual abuse is about power and has been done without the male predator even having an erection. As for giving them simulated porn, I the fantasy is just being fed, and possibly marginalized in their head.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
you cant call them predatory until they act like a predator!


They stalk; they prep the victim; they hunt; they move in for the 'kill'. Pedophiles are predators at all the stages. The only problem is that the victim doesn't know when much of that is happening until it is too late.

Look at Michael Jackson. He started slow ..invites them over; makes friends; snuggles up; a little touch; more touching; licking heads; etc etc....

It builds up from the stalk to the kill. It is all predatorial.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by hogtie
Riley,
Chemical castration may or may not help. Violent sexual abuse is about power and has been done without the male predator even having an erection.

You have a point.. though lower testosterone levels may inhibit violent tendancies.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 04:01 PM
link   
As a therapist, I have worked with pedophiliacs. Most of them are in very deep denial that they are hurting a child. They are very difficult to reason with, worse than any alcoholic or drug addict. They really believe they are doing something good for the child and that they love them. The truth is that they are not capable of having a mature, loving, sexual relationship with another adult so they turn to kids. IMO, this shows that they are incapable of loving anyone. They have an intense obsession over child molesting and I've never known of one who was able to remain celibate. There may be some, but I haven't come across any so far.

Most child molesters molest because they themselves were molested as a child. It is not a preference or a choice they make, it is a sick obsession and they are no more able to control their impulses than a serial killer, in fact some molesters are serial killers of children.

It was well known in the psychology field that child molesters simply aren't able to be rehabilitated, any more than any sociopath is. In fact, I suspect there is an element of sociopathology in child molesters. IMO, it is a disorder, a sickness, not a sexual preference. It's alot like rape where on the surface it seems to be about sex, but it really isn't. It's about having power over another person, who is helpless. A pretty sick bully tactic.

And I do believe there is a difference between molesting small children and being sexual with say a 16 y.o.. Some 16 y.o. are pretty sophisticated these days. I don't advise older adults to ahve sex with 16 y.o., I still think it's about having power over someone less powerful than you. It's kind of a gray area.

One could call them serial rapists. Its' a very fine line between molesting and raping a child. Children are taught to OBEY their elders so they do it, thinking they're supposed to or out of fear. It is very usual for a molester to tell the child that he/she (yes there are women molesters out there) will kill their pet or their family if they ever tell anyone. I've seen the results of what an adult who was molested is like. Far too much. It really messes up a kid's life and they are never the same.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Ok, not reading the whole thread since the responses are all so long...


I'm not sure if it could be conisdered a sexual preference or not,
but there are groups (mostly European) out there that campaign
for the rights.

In my opinion if both parties are consenting, than I don't have a
problem, and based on my own development, I'd say a minimum
age would be eight(8), sincee when I was eight(8) I knew what sex was,
and I could have made the dicision to participate in it if circumstances
created such a situation.

[edit on 9/15/2006 by iori_komei]



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by hogtie

Originally posted by radardog

This issue is about consent. An adult can have sex with a 14 year old in Canada and not be a pedophile. Or an adult could have sex with a 16 year old and not be a pedophile -- 18 in Texas. Isn't it obvious that Canadian minors have a much better grasp of sexual acts than children in Texas? This is arbitrary clap trap.

[edit on 15-9-2006 by radardog]


You are confusing this with hebephilia, wich is primarily an attraction to adolescents. These are arguably two different things.

Riley,
Chemical castration may or may not help. Violent sexual abuse is about power and has been done without the male predator even having an erection. As for giving them simulated porn, I the fantasy is just being fed, and possibly marginalized in their head.



Supposedly they are two different things. In regards to "sexual maturity," which can (arguably) be a difference of minutes, or even seconds. The twelve year old girl the second before her first period, and the second afterwards. A very inane distinction -- especially when we no longer have sex necessarily for reproduction. Either way it comes down to consent, which is also oddly (and differently) defined in other societies and governments.

We can point out that a 3 month infant can not consent to eating pork, let alone sex rather easily. However, those boundaries get a little gray once we get into a stage where a child's communication progresses a bit more. 11? 12? 13? 14? 15? 16? 17? 18? 19? 20? We all do not mature as quickly as everyone else, yet we pinpoint a few exceptional years to start with. While pragmatic, it is not necessarily just.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 11:01 PM
link   
Let's play devils advocate for a moment.How would catagorize someone who started having sexual intercourse at a young age( lets say 10 or 11 years old), could they not simply prefer sex with younger people? What about all the guys who had sex when they were 14-16, could they not prefer to want to have sex with younger people as they get older? At the age of 18 does our brain wash out all the old memorys of underage sexual encounters because it's against the law. Rape is quite different to a visual preference. If a 16 year old appears more attractive than a 30 year old...so what. Someone who rapes a 6 year old is different to someone who is attracted visually to youthfullness. Why are young men/women not labled as pedo's when they engage in under age sex, yet as soon as one of the consenting peoples age hits 18, it's totally different.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Every reason in this thread why pedo is wrong... is the exact same reasons homosexuality was wrong many years ago.

But its just our culture now adays to vilify anything that isnt mainstream.

raping children is not pedophilia. Pedos like young boys and girls. IE/ under 18 over 12.

Sorry if i sound so cold about this. seems so logical though.



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 11:22 PM
link   
Hummm...realy a hard subject to debate. first i think that we can't put all in the same sac.

I remember some one sayed that acording to science peadophilia is a desorder....well don't forget that just untill some time ago, the same goes for homosexuality, but at the present it is not cosidered one!, so science is envolving and maybe same day peadophilia can be at the same status.

i think moust of the people is fusing peadophilia with "rape"!, and that it's a diferent subject at all. we have rapers in all the sexual classes(homos, heteros, bissexuals, bestiality, etc



posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Although the criteria for pedophilia varies somewhat, in the US, DSM-IV provides the criteria for diagnosis.


Over a period of at least six months, recurrent, intense, sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 or younger).

The fantasies, sexual urges or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning.

The person is at least age 16 years and at least five years older than the child or children in Criterion A. Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13- year-old.

medem.com


These are clinical criteria. The laws differ from state to state, but generally any person under 18 is below the age of consent and the laws for having sex with a teenager under 18 are different than having sex with a prepubescent child, using 18 and pubescences as generalizations for specific ages that are provided for in the laws of different states.

Having sex with a teenager who is below the age of consent is usually statutory rape, because even if the sex is consensual, the child cannot legally give consent. In some states, the law is called unlawful sexual penetration, or something similar.

Therefore, considerations of sexual preference are invalid as the law provides that sex between individuals below a certain age and adults are against the law and provides protection for those who are not physically or emotionally ready for the burden of responsibility that goes along with sexual activity.

Take the time to read the link. It does a good job of explaining the clinical issues regarding pedophilia.

Google Search


[edit on 2006/9/15 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 01:24 AM
link   
Thx for the link grady, interesting indeed.
and yes, other problem i see with this(as for other kind of problems also) is the law diferences from state to state, or from country from country...hard to find any equilibrium in this subject.





new topics
top topics
 
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join