Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 289

Thread: Pedophilia

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iceberg View Post
    Why do you feel the need to defend pedophiles? They aren't victims and are of the worst scum of society.
    Are you confusing pedophiles with child molesters? Assuming you know the difference, why do you consider pedophiles to be the worst scum of society? It's not their fault who they are attracted to.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    140

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    Are you confusing pedophiles with child molesters? Assuming you know the difference, why do you consider pedophiles to be the worst scum of society? It's not their fault who they are attracted to.
    Child Molesters are pedophiles. Since it would be irrational and uneducated to say that just because you have a strong sexual attraction to children doesn't mean you'll try anything. They are the worst scum of society because children are the most innocent and defenceless members of our population. Sexually violating them will scar them for life. And the child is completely defenceless to stop it.

    It's not a psychopath's fault that they like to kill people, should we defend them too? By your logic we should. Since psychopathy is something you are born with, and like pedophilia it involves hurting others.

    You still haven't answered my question, why are you defending people who want to sexually violate children?
    FC: 1463 5647 1777


    Come check out my Trade Shop!!!

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iceberg View Post
    Are you actually contending that pedophiles are victims? And that most are innocent? That is seriously disgusting. Even if a pedophile doesn't physically touch a child they will probably watch child porn. True there might be a small population of pedophiles that keep in under control. I guess that one's that cannot could always move to Saudi Arabia or another throw-back country where raping, sorry I meant marrying, little girls is OK.

    Why do you feel the need to defend pedophiles? They aren't victims and are of the worst scum of society.
    I disagree on one of those points: my guess is that most people that are honestly attracted to children don't actually act on their attraction. If it isn't most, I'd say it's pretty close to half. Those are the people that make this argument complex, because they suffer the stress of taking the blame for their active counterparts, making it less likely they will stick their neck out to get help, and more likely for them to either implode or explode under the pressure.

    Then again, the DSM says their attracting must be causing trouble to be categorized as pedophilia, so it's possible that people a professional would call pedophiles is not the same as the people that marioguy is defending.
    Last edited by CSolarstorm; 13th August 2012 at 5:10 AM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Off doing something important
    Posts
    4,881

    Default

    I do not understand why there is any comparison of pedophilia and homosexuality. Pedophilia is far more similar to bestiality. Both involve attraction to a being that doesn't have the same understanding and thus cannot consent to fulfilling the subject's desires. This is where I find the OP went wrong. Can we talk about this at all?



    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    What's the youngest a person can have an orgasm?
    Having an orgasm =/= enjoying sex. Some rapists will force their victim to orgasm, and then scream that this somehow means being raped was somehow enjoyable, and thus consensual, and thus totally acceptable. If I forced a foreign object up your anus until you reached orgasm, does that mean you enjoyed it and this I did nothing wrong?

    ~Psychic
    Ever wanted to attend a Pokémon convention?
    Check out Pokéthon, a new sub-event at Otakuthon in Montreal, Canada this August!


    Like us on Facebook for news and updates!

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iceberg View Post
    Child Molesters are pedophiles. Since it would be irrational and uneducated to say that just because you have a strong sexual attraction to children doesn't mean you'll try anything. They are the worst scum of society because children are the most innocent and defenceless members of our population. Sexually violating them will scar them for life. And the child is completely defenceless to stop it.

    It's not a psychopath's fault that they like to kill people, should we defend them too? By your logic we should. Since psychopathy is something you are born with, and like pedophilia it involves hurting others.

    You still haven't answered my question, why are you defending people who want to sexually violate children?
    Your lack of reading comprehension is starting to annoy me. As I said before:
    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    I really hate when people confused pedophile with child molester, because it's the same as confusing person with rapist.
    Pedophilia by itself doesn't harm anyone. It's harmful only when it's acted upon. You seriously sound like those people who say that all men are lustful creatures of the night, and that women have to cover themselves to tame the savage beasts.

    As for your question, why am I defending pedophiles? Perhaps I'm actually a pedophile who is getting pissed off for getting wrongly accused for being a child molester by ignorant people, or maybe I just wanted to play devil's advocate to see if the commonly perceived view is actually the right side. Is it both? Is it neither? Who knows?

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychic View Post
    Having an orgasm =/= enjoying sex. Some rapists will force their victim to orgasm, and then scream that this somehow means being raped was somehow enjoyable, and thus consensual, and thus totally acceptable. If I forced a foreign object up your anus until you reached orgasm, does that mean you enjoyed it and this I did nothing wrong?

    ~Psychic
    That didn't really answer my question. I honestly thought having an orgasm and enjoying sex were the same thing. I wouldn't know. Thanks for signing your name in the bottom though.

    ~marioguy
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Creeping on your boyfriend
    Posts
    1,652

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    That didn't really answer my question. I honestly thought having an orgasm and enjoying sex were the same thing. I wouldn't know. Thanks for signing your name in the bottom though.

    ~marioguy
    Perhaps going to Google would be a more effective medium than posting in this thread about it. All in all her point still stands though, there really is no importance in when the orgasm can happen or not because the act of pedophilia would still be harmful for the child.

    ~Moogles


  7. #82
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moogles View Post
    Perhaps going to Google would be a more effective medium than posting in this thread about it. All in all her point still stands though, there really is no importance in when the orgasm can happen or not because the act of pedophilia would still be harmful for the child.

    ~Moogles
    I was only asking because I forgot what being a child was like. My memories update themselves so it feels like I always knew what I know now.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychic View Post
    Pedophilia is far more similar to bestiality. Both involve attraction to a being that doesn't have the same understanding and thus cannot consent to fulfilling the subject's desires..
    I find that rather interesting, though what you said after this was just hilarious lol.

    Though this statement is very interesting because if one is to consider pedophilia, unnatural, without any moral attachments. Then they would not understand that theirs a chemical deformity and or abnormality within that persons brains in which causes them to have a natural attraction to something that would otherwise be considered unnatural.
    Though with this said, if one understands the chemical processes and or things that cause said attraction to anything, like that in which i described, then theirs no way in hell that person could ever consider such people to be and or acting UN-naturally because they were born with that mutation and or abnormality. Which in essence, proves that they are simply being theirselfs and are acting in accordance to how they were born, thus acting naturally no matter how "UN-natural" this may seem.

    This exact thing as Phychic mentioned, is present in bestiality fans. Though i believe that with bestiality, as to appose pedophilia, that someone could perhaps gain a natural love towards all things and further such matters in a physical way? Though i find it hard to believe that some goat may have wanted to have sex with some human, though the point with this is that if "said" animal wanted to have sex with a human though unnatural it would seem is their anything wrong with this is the human in the matter had no problem with it.
    Though back to the key point, which is pedophiles though may justify their acts by saying ,well, the person i had sex with enjoyed it and had an orgasm so how was it rape, is obliviously just trying to justify their actions because said "rape(e) more likely than not didn't consent to it. BUT this rapist,pedophile or however you may want to categorize them, are just acting normal because of their abnormality and or mutation within their brains that cause this natural attraction to cow,goat or child...
    Bug-Type Represent !
    I am the Big Bad moth, if you want some, come get some..

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,299

    Default

    There is no similarity between being a pedophile and a homosexual. Why? Because with pedophiles the attraction is usually one-sided and in many cases the children are often too young to even know what they are doing. Many children often struggle with anxiety and other mental problems later in life as a result of the attacks. Of course there are some cases which involve teenagers instead of children, but even here it's still problematic because it's well known that teenagers often lack the inability to properlly think things througb, unlike adults. That's why courts take age into account when young people are being convicted. Young people (those under 18) will often recieve lesser sentences than adults (those over 18). However when it comes to homosexual relationships, the attraction is mutual and both are aware of what they are doing. Most homosexual relationships are loving and therefore don't cause axiety or mental problems later in life.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wherever the adventure lies
    Posts
    9,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Psychic View Post
    Having an orgasm =/= enjoying sex. Some rapists will force their victim to orgasm, and then scream that this somehow means being raped was somehow enjoyable, and thus consensual, and thus totally acceptable. If I forced a foreign object up your anus until you reached orgasm, does that mean you enjoyed it and this I did nothing wrong?
    That is true, however, without the ability to have an orgasm, sex is little more than putting random body parts in holes, and that in itself is something very few people would enjoy. That's why it's so frowned upon.

    However, pedophilia in the other sense of one or more partners being physically capable of having sex (read, having an orgasm) but being unable to give consent due to being a child legally is a more interesting case, since now we have to analyze what is defined as an adult. One's body stops developing at around age 16-18, correct? So normally that should mean that one should be a fully functioning and fully participating adult by age 18. But that's not all there is to the issue. Even though in the eyes of the (U.S.) law, adulthood begins at age 18, one still cannot drink until age 21, or rent a car until (IIRC) age 25. As it turns out, one's mind isn't fully developed until their late 20's, as (and my memory of this fact is a bit sketchy) the part of the brain that allows one to make rational decisions isn't fully developed until then. This muddies the entire concept of adulthood. If they use that argument in favor of drinking and renting a car, why is it that the law considers us adults at 18? Would that not be equally dangerous to allow 18 year olds to smoke, serve in the military, or (in the case of this topic) have consensual sex? If one's mind is as impulsive as they claim it is as a young adult, should that mean that people at that age cannot truly give consent? Society needs to rethink what it defines to be an adult, because it seems to be all over the place in this day and age. I can't say for sure if allowing 16 year olds to have sex is right or wrong, but I can say it's no more wrong than allowing 18 year olds to have sex.
    Quote Originally Posted by LizardonX View Post
    Tabitha has really let himself go, just how many lava cookies did he eat in the last 11 years?

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Johto
    Posts
    1,332

    Default

    Yes, homosexuality is different from pedophilia. I am generally shifted to think of pedophilia as wrong, but it pretty much is. As OP highlighted the child molestation effects, it has negative effects. However, if the "child" is nearing an adult age (like above poster said) it shouldn't, well, be called pedophilia. If they both know and consent to it, it wouldn't be horribly problematic...

    I'm not in favour of pedophilia, of course not, but if they are 17 and they both know what they want and such, it wouldn't be a horribly bad thing in that sense (well, this applies to American Law though).
    Last edited by AquaRegisteel; 13th August 2012 at 4:14 PM.

    Current Hunt: Sudowoodo [Badge Quest #4]

    170 SRs


  12. #87
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    into that good night
    Posts
    10,407

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    I actually have to disagree, if we break down sex to it's most primal level, reproduction, it is entirely equivalent to homosexuality and other orientations. Homosexuality, Beastiality, Pedophilia, all do not lead to reproduction, the person is sexually attractive to some one or some thing that is unable to physically reproduce.

    I mean we can all go round and round about what is adult, and what is consent, but at the end of the day it all comes down to our basic primal urges, and for those one or two percent outside the whole that are wired in a different way sexually.
    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Mind you I am only comparing it because I am detaching our emotion revoltion of a person having sex with a child. Take that away and what do you have? Some one who is physically attracted to a certain set of characteristics that make them unable to breed. How is that honestly different than Homosexuality? Or Bestiality? Or anything else outside of Heterosexual sex?
    First, as I will further explain to Celestial Moth below, the descriptor "natural" is a poor indicator of the healthfulness, appropriateness, or legal defensibility of any action or event. If you're going to argue that evolution has left us our urges, you'll have to do so with more modesty and attention to detail. One could say that sex feels good because it was crucial to our reproduction, but that does not mean that only procreation necessarily felt good. Sex might just feel good regardless of who or what one is doing it to (to play off a line from Martin Crane, haha). To argue that because heterosexual sex is the only form of sex that procreates it is therefore the only form of sex acceptable as "normal" is to argue from nature, which of course is generally a very simple, if convincing, fallacy. We know that hetero sex is the only procreating sex, and we may even grant you that procreation is the original evolutionary point or purpose of sex in general, but you would still be stuck at the "is." Both statements could just as easily be argued historical accounts (descriptive) as normative accounts (prescriptive); neither of those statements provides their own reasoning that non-procreative sex is by any ethical or scientific measure "less than" procreative sex.

    Second, this argument that homosexuality is equivalent to pedophilia and all other non-heterosexual orientations/desires by virtue of their shared inability to produce offspring, and that that specifically is the measure by which we should categorize them as mental disorders or not, fails because it does not save heterosexuality from its own trappings; heterosexuals can be attracted to infertile mates, fulfilling the same "no-offspring" criterion as the other orientations and landing heterosexuality in the "mental disorder" pile as well. When your project is to build a category as delicate and consequential as what constitutes a mental or sexual disorder, you won't be successful by trying to use a tool of classification as blunt and unrefined as "inability to produce offspring."

    Third, pedophilia is not significantly different from homosexuality only because we have a special emotional concern for children. There is actual harm caused to children by involvement in premature or one-sided intimate relationships. Protecting them from this harm is not a case of special pleading for children, but rather just another entirely unremarkable instance of the wider standard of protecting any human with rights from preventable harms. Additionally, the implication that things like "what is adult" and "what is consent" are secondary to "whether it is a primal urge" as considerations in "what it all comes down to," which in this context includes in its meanings "what is acceptable sexual behavior," lacks the understanding that the acceptability of sexual desires or behaviors is defined by the ethical and legal statuses of their targets, not their ability to produce offspring. "Ability to produce offspring" is not an ethically relevant category. The evidence of the history of natural selection tells us how things came to be, not whether those things are acceptable or inappropriate, healthy or harmful.

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    That's a rather grim way to look at things. Imagine that there's a guy who has a crush on you, but you don't like him in return. According to your logic, the guy will eventually rape you and it's only a matter of time.
    I'm quoting this because it might just be the single most intelligent and successful point I've ever seen marioguy make. Kudos, marioguy!

    A few people here, actually, are employing the outdated metaphor of a hydraulic model of human motivation, in which the 'pressure' of a desire gone unfulfilled 'builds up' to a 'critical mass' at which it violently and unavoidably explodes. This is not how human motivation, desire, or violence works, fortunately, and marioguy here does a good job of illustrating that while refuting the argument Iceberg was making.

    Quote Originally Posted by Celestial Moth View Post
    Though this statement is very interesting because if one is to consider pedophilia, unnatural, without any moral attachments. Then they would not understand that theirs a chemical deformity and or abnormality within that persons brains in which causes them to have a natural attraction to something that would otherwise be considered unnatural.
    Though with this said, if one understands the chemical processes and or things that cause said attraction to anything, like that in which i described, then theirs no way in hell that person could ever consider such people to be and or acting UN-naturally because they were born with that mutation and or abnormality. Which in essence, proves that they are simply being theirselfs and are acting in accordance to how they were born, thus acting naturally no matter how "UN-natural" this may seem.
    In addition to the specific arguments against this concept of "natural" being a justification I made to BigLutz above, I need to point out the fallacy of this argument here. In a materialist conception of the universe, all human tendencies, natures, desires, and personal psychologies can be traced back to a genetic influence to some extent. Anything any person does, then, qualifies as "natural" by your definition, thereby making them simply "being theirselfs" and "acting in accordance to how they were born." And if this conception of natural is enough to exonerate that person from any crimes they may have committed, then anything at all can be legally defended. I'll say again, whether something is "natural" is a poor indicator of its ethical or legal defensibility, especially this particular conception of it.




    Arguments from nature are almost always fallacies, and that rule holds for Celestial Moth's and BigLutz's posts here. In addition, when the topic under discussion involves effects on individuals' well-being (either the well-being of oneself or others), you cannot argue any conception of that topic without the ethical (or, if you like, moral) attachments. Pedophilia is a disorder because it is a human psychological variation with the potential to violate the rights of those it targets when put into action and because it can negatively affect the well-being and healthy life functions of both the targets of the desire and the person harboring said desire; not because it's not straight-up white conservative Christian hetero missionary-style status quo, not because we think kids are precious and special, and not because you can't usually impregnate a third grader.
    Last edited by Profesco; 22nd August 2012 at 8:33 AM.

    Robin Williams
    1951-2014
    "You're only given one little spark of madness. You mustn't lose it."

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Profesco View Post

    Arguments from nature are almost always fallacies
    Hmm your quite right, because as you suggested with this "nature" defense you could indeed defend any action being it originated "within nature's hands".
    First of thank you soo much bro i learnt a few things from you today I do see the fallacies within my argument in particular. The tromer involved with rape i believe no one
    could defend, because of the physiological damage and first hand mental cases in which many have experienced. Though the socially acceptable thing would be to continue mating with other humans. The logic in which follows the mutations of our brains and the continual mutation, in abnormal ways would suggest that more things would be considered socially accepted and more things will be considered "compatible". I say this because of the people that have abnormal attracting tendencies to different things. Like people who like to eat metal objects, people who have sexual urges and or are attracted to objects or materials, an example is a lady who is sexual attracted to the berlin wall( look it up >.<). These are all similar things because of the wide difference of attracting tendencies in which most of these people feel and feel they have the obligation to for-fill.

    Obliviously it is morally wrong, that in which pedophiles do and im fully ready to accept the ramifications for defending the defenseless. BUT i think its sort of immoral to not behave in a natural manner. Their will always be limits to what is morally acceptable even in the most disturbing of examples to this rule and or example, though the result of someone in which is suppressing anything often can become something greater or worse than the first original suppressed feeling (physiologically). However, because of the abundant fallacies within such a defense other examples of this scenario eclipse this possible justification. I'm not suggesting that pedophiles get giving a kid because that's just messed up and the pain in which they would inflict would be irreversible. I've researched this slightly in the passed and if heard of accounts of pedophiles killing theirselfs because of thoughts in which they were having and couldn't justify.Obliviously this particular example only projects the feelings in which one being inflicted by such mental disorders feels but the emotions in which such people have, because of this mutation or abnormality also may have been changed as a result.
    Now i'm not sure who could justify Crippling and destroying a child mentally, but those who do no act upon these immoral acts and or thoughts may suffer great pain theirselfs.
    Last edited by Celestial Moth; 13th August 2012 at 6:32 PM.
    Bug-Type Represent !
    I am the Big Bad moth, if you want some, come get some..

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celestial Moth View Post
    Now i'm not sure who could justify Crippling and destroying a child mentally, but those who do no act upon these immoral acts and or thoughts may suffer great pain theirselfs.
    You don't have to jusify a wrongdoing to feel sorrow for the person who did it. You can feel sympathy for both the child and the person that wronged them and at the same time feel anger for them for hurting the child. Having mixed emotions for the bigger picture is a fine way to look at it IMO, and it has its merits over choosing to just feel for whoever has the moral high ground.
    Last edited by CSolarstorm; 13th August 2012 at 6:55 PM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Profesco View Post
    I'm quoting this because it might just be the single most intelligent and successful point I've ever seen marioguy make. Kudos, marioguy!

    A few people here, actually, are employing the outdated metaphor of a hydraulic model of human motivation, in which the 'pressure' of a desire gone unfulfilled 'builds up' to a 'critical mass' at which it violently and unavoidably explodes. This is not how human motivation, desire, or violence works, fortunately, and marioguy here does a good job of illustrating that while refuting the argument Iceberg was making.
    Gee Profesco, you're making me blush, but that could also be taken as an insult.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  16. #91
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Inna House... With Cable!!!
    Posts
    3,821

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Johto_girl View Post
    There is no similarity between being a pedophile and a homosexual. Why? Because with pedophiles the attraction is usually one-sided and in many cases the children are often too young to even know what they are doing. Many children often struggle with anxiety and other mental problems later in life as a result of the attacks. Of course there are some cases which involve teenagers instead of children, but even here it's still problematic because it's well known that teenagers often lack the inability to properlly think things througb, unlike adults. That's why courts take age into account when young people are being convicted. Young people (those under 18) will often recieve lesser sentences than adults (those over 18). However when it comes to homosexual relationships, the attraction is mutual and both are aware of what they are doing. Most homosexual relationships are loving and therefore don't cause axiety or mental problems later in life.
    This statement on the surface may not be true. There are studies that show that the homosexual brain is in fact similar to the brain of the the opposing gender. Yes male and female brains are build differently from one another and thus why the genders process information differently. S gay male's brain is similar to a heterosexual female's brain, and that is in theory why gay men tend to think and act with a feminine manner.

    By comparison do we know if the brain of a pedophile is physically different from that of a normal heterosexual brain? Like Homosexuals, the Pedophile says they are attracted to something other than the normal male/female attraction.

    So if brain construction can effect hetero/homo urges it is theoretically possible for the same to be said about the brain construction of Pedos/non pedos.

    Now to the question on whether one legal victory could open the door for others... I still say it is possible. If blacks didn't win the right to vote women may not have had the opportunity either.
    (The 15th amendments gave black men the right to vote in 1870 {although it didn't really make much difference because they were still often denied to vote until the 1960s civil rights acts.})

    So one legal outcome can influence legal battles to come.

    So true!

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    140

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    Your lack of reading comprehension is starting to annoy me. As I said before:
    Pedophilia by itself doesn't harm anyone. It's harmful only when it's acted upon. You seriously sound like those people who say that all men are lustful creatures of the night, and that women have to cover themselves to tame the savage beasts.

    As for your question, why am I defending pedophiles? Perhaps I'm actually a pedophile who is getting pissed off for getting wrongly accused for being a child molester by ignorant people, or maybe I just wanted to play devil's advocate to see if the commonly perceived view is actually the right side. Is it both? Is it neither? Who knows?
    The fact that you dismiss a point with a stupid comment like "Your lack of reading comprehension is starting to annoy me." is a testament to your ignorance. As I clearly stated, in my opinion child molesters and pedophiles are one in the same, just like psychopaths and murderers are one in the same. I know you think differently, but I don't agree. The whole argument that not all pedophiles actually have sex with children is rather nonsensical to this discussion. Since the point of this discussion was a) the comparison of homosexuality to pedophilia and b) the notion that some think pedophilia should be legal. If you just happen to be attracted to children it would be impossible to police that, since that attraction would be confined to your head (which is the kind of pedophile you are defending; those that don't do anything). It is uneducated to bring up those types of pedophiles in this conversation then. The pedophiles that act on their urges, and therefore are subject to policing, are what this topic is concerning. As the OP, I can state this.

    It would be ridiculous to talk about banning thoughts of sex with children, which you contend most pedophiles only have, because you can't arrest someone for their thoughts. To discuss the banning of those who actually engage in sex, which as another poster pointed out is what many professionals consider pedophiles, is a much more effective use of time. So it would be greatly appreciated if you would stop wasting time discussing people who only have thoughts about children with me given the arguments I have made.

    As to your answer to my question, I am scared by your comment "to see if the commonly perceived view is on the right side". Are you suggesting that the common view that pedophilia is bad to be wrong? Or are you saying that the common view that pedophiles will eventually harass a child is wrong?
    FC: 1463 5647 1777


    Come check out my Trade Shop!!!

  18. #93
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wherever the adventure lies
    Posts
    9,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iceberg View Post
    As I clearly stated, in my opinion child molesters and pedophiles are one in the same
    They're not interchangeable, in the eyes of the law, pedophilia can also be when a someone physically capable but not legally allowed to has sex. For instance if an 18 year old has sex with a 16 year old. And that's a whole different ball game. So no, that can't possibly be correct.
    Quote Originally Posted by LizardonX View Post
    Tabitha has really let himself go, just how many lava cookies did he eat in the last 11 years?

  19. #94
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SHA SHABBA RANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Posts
    920

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    Gee Profesco, you're making me blush, but that could also be taken as an insult.
    this thread...it scares me.

    Watch Your Back, Or Ill Have Your Girl On Hers

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iceberg View Post
    The fact that you dismiss a point with a stupid comment like "Your lack of reading comprehension is starting to annoy me." is a testament to your ignorance. As I clearly stated, in my opinion child molesters and pedophiles are one in the same, just like psychopaths and murderers are one in the same. I know you think differently, but I don't agree.
    Since you have been stating your opinion as fact, that's a testament to your ignorance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Iceberg View Post
    If you just happen to be attracted to children it would be impossible to police that, since that attraction would be confined to your head (which is the kind of pedophile you are defending; those that don't do anything). It is uneducated to bring up those types of pedophiles in this conversation then. The pedophiles that act on their urges, and therefore are subject to policing, are what this topic is concerning. As the OP, I can state this.
    You cannot just change what the debate is about five pages in just because you didn't fully understand what the definition of pedophilia was.

    Quote Originally Posted by Metagross Guy View Post
    this thread...it scares me.
    Why does that post scare you?
    Last edited by Sadib; 14th August 2012 at 12:36 AM.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iceberg View Post
    If you just happen to be attracted to children it would be impossible to police that, since that attraction would be confined to your head (which is the kind of pedophile you are defending; those that don't do anything). It is uneducated to bring up those types of pedophiles in this conversation then. The pedophiles that act on their urges, and therefore are subject to policing, are what this topic is concerning. As the OP, I can state this.
    Take the time to read and think before you post in these chats because others actually do. Please try to understand the topic and if you don't, don't say anything because misinterpretations only create a whole new set of useless problems, that we have to address and clear up before we move on.
    Bug-Type Represent !
    I am the Big Bad moth, if you want some, come get some..

  22. #97
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    An archive's alcove.
    Posts
    852

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    I actually have to disagree, if we break down sex to it's most primal level, reproduction, it is entirely equivalent to homosexuality and other orientations. Homosexuality, Beastiality, Pedophilia, all do not lead to reproduction, the person is sexually attractive to some one or some thing that is unable to physically reproduce.

    I mean we can all go round and round about what is adult, and what is consent, but at the end of the day it all comes down to our basic primal urges, and for those one or two percent outside the whole that are wired in a different way sexually.
    Ignoring fine distinctions because they conflict with your message just makes you look like a prat. I don't have sex with women to reproduce. I do it because I like feeling good, and I like making them feel good; My sexual activity is equivalent to all of those things in your opinion based on your statement.
    "He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom."
    Gandalf to Saruman

  23. #98
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,921

    Default

    Actually Iceberg, not all child molesters do it because they are pedophiles; there are a variety of reasons. It is possible to have sex with something without being attracted to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    You cannot just change what the debate is about five pages in just because you didn't fully understand what the definition of pedophilia was.
    Yes she can, it's her topic. Besides, a number of people have been trying to tell you that they are not talking about dormant pedophiles.

    Quote Originally Posted by Celestial Moth View Post
    Take the time to read and think before you post in these chats because others actually do. Please try to understand the topic and if you don't, don't say anything because misinterpretations only create a whole new set of useless problems, that we have to address and clear up before we move on.
    She's the author of this topic, and put what she wanted to talk about in the first post. Essentially you're scolding her for not reading your contribution to a thread she opened. It's a little harsh.
    Last edited by CSolarstorm; 14th August 2012 at 2:45 AM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  24. #99
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyC View Post
    Actually Iceberg, not all child molesters do it because they are pedophiles; there are a variety of reasons. It is possible to have sex with something without being attracted to it.
    If that were the case then would mean all of those prison rapists are actually gay.

    Quote Originally Posted by SunnyC View Post
    Yes she can, it's her topic. Besides, a number of people have been trying to tell you that they are not talking about dormant pedophiles.

    She's the author of this topic, and put what she wanted to talk about in the first post. Essentially you're scolding her for not reading your contribution to a thread she opened. It's a little harsh.
    Then why not title the thread: Child Molesters? It would be like if you suddenly decided that your homosexuality debate is now only about gay politicians and nothing else.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  25. #100
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    If that were the case then would mean all of those prison rapists are actually gay.
    It took me a minute to get it, but good point. As I understand it, prison rapists do so to assert dominance, not necessarily because they're gay. Some people are just so twisted that they'll molest a child just to abuse them, or even to hurt someone else.

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    Then why not title the thread: Child Molesters? It would be like if you suddenly decided that your homosexuality debate is now only about gay politicians and nothing else.
    I guess I can see your point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •