Pedophiles - 'Brand' them like the animals they are

reply to post by queenofsheba

A pedophile is an adult who is sexually attracted to a child. A minor child is under the age of 18 in most states.

So, you are saying that Being attracted to a 17 year old girl, is.... Pedophilia?


I would be BRANDED for that?


Oh, and Minor is not the same thing as "Child"

The two words do not have interchangeable definitions, as much as you would like to believe that.

I think the thread is about pedophiles who by definition are predators of minor children. You really want to defend them? Have fun with all that....

So, a 20 year old guy with a 17 year old girlfriend is a Pedophile?

Is that what you are saying?

-Edrick

I agree with this in theory, but there are plenty of cases where men are pedophiles only to the ignorant, where their crime exists in the gray area. Usually in those cases, they are actually hebephiles or ephebophilies, or commit "statutory rape". In other words, not all "pedophiles" commit sex acts with "young" children.

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

Oh, and JUST as an FYI...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7ffe67d2b0e5.jpg[/atsimg]

Stormi Bree Henley (born December 6, 1990) is a beauty queen from Crossville, Tennessee who won the Miss Teen USA 2009 title.

Henley won the Miss Tennessee Teen USA 2009 title on October 5, 2008 after competing in the pageant for the first time. Her sister titleholder is Kristen Motil, Miss Tennessee USA 2009.

That's Right ladies and Gentlemen... this girl is only 17 years old in this picture.


Your *ALL* '""Pedophiles""' now....


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8809ba37ceb5.png[/atsimg]

-Edrick

reply to post by Edrick


You make no sense.

No one here is a pedophile because of your post. Stop pretending they are.

reply to post by Edrick


My definition of a pedophile is a molester of children. What I am referring to and defending is my stance as a parent of a beautiful 10 yr old girl and 15 yr old son. Make no mistake; I'd take out anyone who messed with my babies.

reply to post by Exuberant1

You make no sense.

No one here is a pedophile because of your post. Stop pretending they are.

You are missing the essential context of the discussion that I was having with queenofsheba, in that I was attempting to highlight the absurdity of her definition of "Pedophile" by placing a picture of what the Western world CONSIDERS to be the hight of Physical Attraction.... what she would Consider as a "Child" of only 17.

@queenofsheba

My definition of a pedophile is a molester of children.

Nope... you said, and I QUOTE:

A pedophile is an adult who is sexually attracted to a child. A minor child is under the age of 18 in most states. I think the thread is about pedophiles who by definition are predators of minor children.

You are claiming that "Pedophilia" means "Someone who has sex with Legal Minors" as opposed to it's ACTUAL definition, as one who has sex with PRE-PUBESCENT children.

The Girl in the preceding Photo was LEGALLY a MINOR, but she was by no means, Pre-Pubescent.

Therefore, your knowledge of the Actual Definition of the term "Pedophile" is grossly inadiquate for the requirements of this conversation.

What I am referring to and defending is my stance as a parent of a beautiful 10 yr old girl and 15 yr old son. Make no mistake; I'd take out anyone who messed with my babies.

You know that Kids are having Sex at like... 13 nowadays... right?

www.cbsnews.com...

-Edrick

Branding them just opens up another can of worms.

Sure, like the "lock 'em up and forget them" mentality acutally works (it doesn't).


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by queenofsheba

Please review the following.

Originally posted by inivux
I agree with this in theory, but there are plenty of cases where men are pedophiles only to the ignorant, where their crime exists in the gray area. Usually in those cases, they are actually hebephiles or ephebophilies, or commit "statutory rape". In other words, not all "pedophiles" commit sex acts with "young" children.

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 7-10-2010 by inivux because: (no reason given)

Pedophile - 0-10
Hebephile - 11-14
Ephebophile - 15 to 19 yrs

A lot of guys (and women) are High Hebephile/Low Ephebophile, hence the term "Jailbait".

Also,

Teleiophilia - 19 to 55
Gerontophilia - 55+

reply to post by Edrick


My background is in Child Protection in Social Services and yes, a 17 yr old is considered a minor child in the state I reside in. Again, this thread addresses pedophiles; child molesters.

reply to post by queenofsheba

My background is in Child Protection in Social Services

And that makes you right about everything, How exactly?

Oh, and just for the Record... A Great many Pedophiles have backgrounds in Child Protective Services... Doll.

a 17 yr old is considered a minor child in the state I reside in.

So, Miss Teen USA should not be considered "Sexually Attractive"?

IS that a Crime?

-Edrick

you wanna brand em, kill em do something to CONVICTED molesters....what about the ones that arent truely guilty, those that are accused of something by a vengeful ex spouse?
If theyre caught in the act or something comes out that proves beyone a shadow of a doubt that they are truely guilty, then yeah severe punishment
I am VERY suprised at the torch and pitchfork mentality of alot of people on here...

reply to post by Edrick


Edrick....seriously callin' me Doll?

reply to post by HomerinNC


I suppose the attitude has something to do with hurting small children. Hello?

reply to post by HomerinNC


Obviously we are talking about those who are guilty. This conversation is from a god's-eye perspective so there is no question about the hypothetical pedophile's guilt, the question is what should be done about the pedophile.

Durrr......

reply to post by queenofsheba


so one makes it okay to do the other?

I can't support branding of sex offenders. My general reason for this is I can't get behind intentionally making someone's life miserable, particularly when the punishment is indefinite.

A specific reason I am against the idea is because I hate the idea of an innocent being forced to suffer a lifetime of stigma and social rejection.

130 death row inmates were exonerated, instead of executed, between 1973 and 2008 due to emerging evidence, including DNA analysis. A smaller number of people have been exonerated posthumously. The Death Penalty Information Center estimates for every seven executions, one death row inmate is exonerated.

- wiki.answers.com

reply to post by HomerinNC

I am VERY suprised at the torch and pitchfork mentality of alot of people on here...

Too bad cause in my book more than torch and pitchforks are needed for pedophiles.

And as I've stated (repeatedly over and over) I'm suggesting the branding of pedophiles where the DNA evidence is positive with no chance of doubt. Or where, lets say, (like in the last little baby boy who was found dead in the bushes a few days ago) the TEETH MARKS the hideous predator left all over the babies back, face and extremities are irrefutable evidence the person is guilty of raping and biting the baby boy to death.

No, I'm not talking about branding some man or woman who's accused of inappropriate actions by a disgruntled teen or ex.

peace

reply to post by JohnnyTHSeed

I can't get behind intentionally making someone's life miserable, particularly when the punishment is indefinite.

How sad. That's exactly what the crime of pedophilia does to the victim. Renders their life miserable with indefinite punishment.

So, who are you going to spend your life defending after this? The victim or the perpetrator?

You don't want to kill them. You don't want to brand them and keep some little child safe in the future. What do you want to do with them? Invite them all over for lunch tea?

Yes, I'm prodding you for answers - with all due respect and no slander on your opinions intended.

peace