What is a pedophile?

[reverse]

Thanks for the welcome and for replying to my post.

 

 

 

Certainly. And if the hatred was removed' date=' there would likely be more and more "non-practicing" pedophiles.[/quote']

 

sir may I ask a few questions, no need to reply if you feel it's prying.

 

is it like an obsession.

are you drawn to this stimuli by an almost magnetic compulsion.

 

Were you always drawn to these stimuli, or did it develop at a particular time in life.

 

What is your motivation for sharing your experance here on SFN.

 

thank you.

[Bettina]

Thanks for the welcome and for replying to my post.

Okay. Can you please give me a synopsis of how you interpreted my previous post? Also' date=' what thought process led you to discard my words?

Yes.

Certainly. And if the hatred was removed, there would likely be more and more "non-practicing" pedophiles.[/quote']

 

Fair enough. I agree that I was harsh in my opinion to your post and I'm sorry.

 

However, good luck in trying to get parents of small children to endorse the idea that pedophiles should be treated as normal. Are you suggesting all peophiles should be recognized as harmless? How do you judge which ones should be called the "good wolves" in sheeptown.

 

Pedohiles by nature, want to have sex with children. Some know what they are, control it, and would never hurt a child. Another is satisfied in just viewing picures of kids in underwear and will "satisfy" himself in the comfort of his home or gawk at us in the mall. He won't hurt us either. Its the last one that worries me.

 

The first two, I do not believe would come to a bb and tell the world what they are, try to make it sound acceptable as a human right, and mention that aoc laws are unacceptable.

 

The last one, again, my own opinion, would be the type so tempted, that if babysitting a child and the child sat with him he would start getting "touchy" with him. He may not physically hurt the child, but his cheap feels may give that boy a complex that will remain with him for the rest of his life.....all for the pedophiles pleasure.

 

Someone stated that you have come here seeking help, and that I too, have done the same. Yes, I admit it. But the difference is that my "curse" only hurts me. no one else.

 

There is a transparent wall between a pedophile and a child murderer. They are all of the same ilk, just some are not so dark. So, there is your answer. Tell me and the mothers and fathers of little kids how we should categorize the different types of pedophiles so we can have some sit with our kids alone in playgrounds, and protect the kids from the ones that follow us home.

 

Just so we understand each other. Some may begin to understand you, but I will not compromise. I put all of you in the same basket and put it as far away from kids as possible.

 

Bettina

[Merle Noir]

do you think that its possible that the more you get to know the child' date=' the more you realise how unready for sex he is? or maybe that you are attracted to the childs body but not there mind?

 

the closest analogy i can think of for me, is if i see a sexy woman, and then find out that their is no aspect of her personality that i find sexually attractive -- she will become less and less attractive to me as i get to know her better. im just curiouse as to why this seems to be the case with you when you get to know a child?[/quote']

 

Using your analogy of women when I have had girlfriends and ended up falling out of love for those sort of reasons I end up usually not wanting to be around them I may get along with them but I start feeling uncomfortable in the relationship. When the sexual desire for a boy dies down I still love to be around him, spend time together, and all that I just tend to not look at him sexually. In other words there is something there within the relationship as I miss them dearly when I'm no longer around him, however the sexual aspect is not as great. A possibility, to built on this idea may be that at first, since I don't know him the only aspect that is possible is sexual, but once I get to know him interest in other areas takes over and the sexual aspect is maybe hidden in the background unless something happens to bring it to mind. I'm not really sure that any of these are the case just trying to take the ideas you guys suggest and put it into context.

[5614]

He won't hurt us either. Its the last one that worries me....[later, same post']...... but I will not compromise. I put all of you in the same basket and put it as far away from kids as possible.

You can see that there are different types of paedophiles, it's not there fault they're born that way, it's up to them how they act. How can you punish someone who was born with a problem but would never act on it?

Or is your problem with telling who truely would never act on it?

 

The first two, I do not believe would come to a bb and tell the world what they are,

Why not?

 

I'm sure there must be a few people in the world who fit into the category of would 'never act on it, but still strongly feel it and must really fight it'... surely you would encourage those people to talk to others, gain courage and support to put all their effort into fighting it.

 

Surely if you were just a normal person who suddenly started liking children, you'd be disturbed with yourself and want help... that's before any action or thoughts have really settled.

 

It's the whole 'talk to others' therapy thingy.

 

make it sound acceptable as a human right, and mention that aoc laws are unacceptable

I think that if somone said paedophiles are acceptable and AOC laws are wrong it'd be a bit extreme and I'd argue against them.

 

Still, if someone said you were an outcast of society and placed laws against you, you would argue back!

[Merle Noir]

sir may I ask a few questions' date=' no need to reply if you feel it's prying.

 

is it like an obsession.

are you drawn to this stimuli by an almost magnetic compulsion. [/quote']

 

I think you where asking SoFarAway but I think they are some good questions so I'd like to answer them as well.

 

I'm assuming by stimuli you are meaning boys that excite me, be it in pictures, or real life or where ever. I guess you could say in a way I'm drawn to a reward stimuli. The sight of a boy just makes me happy and content and excites me. For example last Friday I walked to a store to buy a few things. A boy rode past on his bike and said hi to me. I wondered momentarily if I knew him and just did not recognize him then I realized that I was smiling and since I had noticed him approaching the sight of him probably induced the smile. (which is a frequent occurrence to the point I don't always notice it) His acknowledgment just added to my joy.

 

Were you always drawn to these stimuli, or did it develop at a particular time in life.

Thats a very difficult question to answer. I can say that around age 12 I was aware of my attraction. Prior to this it gets very difficult to answer. I do know that as far back as I can remember I have associated and gotten a long very well with younger kids. However in these incidents prior to age 12 I have no recollection of any kind of attraction. It may be that the attraction was there and I just did not realize it or had no reason to see it as anything other then normal, or that there was no attraction and these are just experiences that in hind sight take on more meaning then they would had I not been a pedophile. My guess is a bit of both.

 

What is your motivation for sharing your experience here on SFN.

 

thank you.

My motivation is that seeing the kind of rationalization that I did' date=' and where it almost lead me, along with some of the same rationalization others do, or have done, I can't help but think that what pedophiles need is support in dealing with an attraction that if acted on is illegal, and can lead to someone else being harmed. I think do to the difficult nature of the subject most people are uninformed or know of myths that are not true and as a result fear what is essential an unknown. This fear I believe leads to more silence and less information and a lack of support that is crucially need. The only way for this cycle which I believe can and does lead to abuse of children is for the silence to be broken. So when ever I get the opportunity to speak with people on the topic I do so... which has lead to everything from disagreements to being banned to death threats along with people that are interested in learning more. I figure this is bigger then me and a worthy cause, if I'm right or if I'm wrong, well I believe the majority will be smart enough to see where I am wrong and where society is wrong and eventually come to the best answer.

 

However, good luck in trying to get parents of small children to endorse the idea that pedophiles should be treated as normal. Are you suggesting all peophiles should be recognized as harmless? How do you judge which ones should be called the "good wolves" in sheeptown.

NO I would not try to suggest all pedophiles are good or should be considered as harmless. However from everything I've seen as well as the studies I've read everything seems to indicate that the largest danger is those that may not recognize their attraction or are in denial of it, due to conflict between what their sub-conscious and conscious mind. However even in helping people come to terms with who they are and providing support for them as with any large broad segment of society you will have people that follow along and get along with everyone and they you'll have those that for what ever reason end up hurting those that they come across.

 

There is no real way to judge who is a good or bad pedophile. Personal instinct may be helpful but it can be easily fooled as well. However I'd say does it really make a difference. Can you judge who is a good or bad pedophile today when you don't even know who may or may not be a pedophile? I should think it twice as hard on parents when they have no clue if the person coming into contact with their child is or is not a pedophile in addition to might he be a good or bad pedophile.

[reverse]

thank you for fielding those.

 

may I ask more?

 

I am very interested in abnormal psychology as it almost defines normal psychology.

 

Do you find that you become acclimatised to the stimuli and require a larger dose to get the same effect,

similar to the way the body gets used to a level of alcohol or marijuana or other drugs.

 

About what percentage of your time do you spend thinking about this and related thoughts

 

thank you.

[Bettina]

There is no real way to judge who is a good or bad pedophile. Personal instinct may be helpful but it can be easily fooled as well. However I'd say does it really make a difference. Can you judge who is a good or bad pedophile today when you don't even know who may or may not be a pedophile? I should think it twice as hard on parents when they have no clue if the person coming into contact with their child is or is not a pedophile in addition to might he be a good or bad pedophile.

 

Thus the problem of being accepted. Since I can't tell whether you are a practicing pedophile (you could be lying) or a controlled one, I must place you in the same basket as the other types I've mentioned.

 

The simple fact remains. A pedophile is a person who is sexually attracted to little kids and you have told us you are a pedophile.

 

I have feelings of sadness for you now, because you are going thru life not being able to fulfill your sexual desires. To say that you won't in the future is unknown and for that reason, I would wish you were never alone with kids.

 

I'm sorry, but this is how I feel about you.

 

Bettina

[Sangderenard]

There are more and more people within communities of those whose mere interests (note: not actions) put them at risk of being violently stigmatized who see a problem with scientific research on their groups. They know the people being questioned aren't being asked the right questions or are only being questioned if arrested, thus polluting the sample pool. It is for this reason, I think, that more and more of them are trying to timidly and anonymously reach out to scientific communities for understanding so that eventually the stigma would be changed or at least put up for discussion. Some are even going to work trying to put together valid survey data. The trouble is, as soon as you admit to having these interests you lose all credibility and possibly certain aspects of your livelyhood. Anyhow, that's what thoughts on the subject I have.

[Newtonian]

Pedophilia is IMO very common.Its certainly been with us throughout our history.In the none too distant past it was socially accepted to actually wed what we now consider a child(correction always been a child but difficult times)

In the social environment now its not acceptable,therefore people must mask and NOT act on the sexual attraction ever!! Which i consider the vast numbers comply with,and understand that its simply wrong regardless of illegality.However deviants who groom ,rape, murder children are not to be pitied,it would be IMO quite incorrect to label them pedophiles.A more fitting label would be monsters

[Sangderenard]

I think you're forgetting the new and arbitrary nature of the definition of adolescent, which is where we've stuck the sexually capable (biologically speaking) group of "children" who in every lower income area are adults and commonly marry. Not to mention the rather unscientific and inflamatory support of stigmatizing. It risks portraying you as insecure of your distance from a catagory when you admit to the prevelance of something near it, even defend that prevelance, but attack it all the same with an arguement that smacks of nothing but cheep sensationalism. Now I'm not defending criminals of this sort. I think there's a serious issue if those activities seem appropriate. But what I am saying is that "A more fitting label would be monsters" has absolutely no place on a forum pretending to be scientific.

[merico]

Do you find that you become acclimatised to the stimuli and require a larger dose to get the same effect' date='

similar to the way the body gets used to a level of alcohol or marijuana or other drugs.[/quote']

 

I hope u dont mind, but could i answer that one as well.

 

In my opinion i dont need to recieve larger amount of the stimuli in order to get the effect of being turned on. Just like when im attracted to a women i get turned on by her, but obviously the more we do together the more i get turned on. When i see a boy i do get turned on, but i also know that i would never be able to have a 'larger level' of him because that would go against my moral/legal beliefs. Whenever i see aboy i still feel the same way as i did when i saw the first boy i liked. in the same context i do however crave more of him, just like straight people crave more of a fit girl they see, or get to know, i just recieve my fix (if i may call it one) by simply taling with him and getting to know the boy. I know due to my predispisition i will always want more of him, but i also know that can never happen due to psychological issues that may have on him if he isnt ready.

 

 

About what percentage of your time do you spend thinking about this and related thoughts

 

thank you

 

To answer this i believe it is that same amouont of time as a straight guy thinks about women, how often do u think of women?? To answer it i think about boys as much as possible whenever i see one or see a picture of one, as well as nearly all the space in between. But i also think about women just not as much as i think about boys.

 

Hope that helps

Merico

[Dak]

Thus the problem of being accepted. Since I can't tell whether you are a practicing pedophile (you could be lying) or a controlled one, I must place you in the same basket as the other types I've mentioned.

i suppose that, in this area, overcaution is better than carelessness.

But what I am saying is that "A more fitting label would be monsters" has absolutely no place on a forum pretending to be scientific.

many posters have been putting forward the idea that there should be seperate names for practacing and non-practacing paedophiles, tho (newtonians comment was directed at practicing paedophiles). although i agree that the actual word is a tad unscientific.

 

how would you paedophiles reccomend changing the law/policy/social attetude/etc to better protect childeren (if you consider them in need of protection)?

[Sayonara]

The question has already been answered' date='

the is "is" quote was taken form a famous situation that encapsulates the BS that's going on here.[/quote']

You seem to be confusing "answered" with "replied to".

[Merle Noir]

thank you for fielding those.

 

may I ask more?

Certainly I'm finding I am learning from a lot of these questions so I really don't mind.

 

I am very interested in abnormal psychology as it almost defines normal psychology.

 

Do you find that you become acclimatised to the stimuli and require a larger dose to get the same effect' date='

similar to the way the body gets used to a level of alcohol or marijuana or other drugs. [/quote'] Yes and no. In terms of being around boys no once I meet some boys I simply want to spend a lot of time with them and generally little desire to meet more... although once I meet a boy I typically meet a lot more through him so if I am craving more to associate with it must be masked. However in the cases when I only had one friend that was a boy I never felt a need for more boys or for the relationship to go further.

 

However when it comes to photographs and erotic stories that I may um enjoy privately I find yes if I don't watch my self it is easy to start down a slippery slope.

 

About what percentage of your time do you spend thinking about this and related thoughts

 

thank you.

Hmmmm hard to explain it does tend to be my default thought so unless occupied by other thoughts I'm thinking about boys all the time. But work tends to have me busy enough that I don't think a lot about boys and so does a lot of other activities. As well it varies from day to day some days I'm so busy I may only think about boys a couple hours out of the day other days when I may just take it easy around the house they are on my mind almost the whole day. Generally I would guess maybe 7 or 8 hours a day though but keep in mind that almost all of those 7 or 8 hours I'm doing other things like work, sports or other hobbies.

[Merle Noir]

Thus the problem of being accepted. Since I can't tell whether you are a practicing pedophile (you could be lying) or a controlled one, I must place you in the same basket as the other types I've mentioned.

Well you sound like your getting close to understanding. Well you're certainly right I could be lying and so could anyone else. Trust is something that has to be built and certainly no one here other then Denver01 knows me well enough to say what degree I maybe lying or not. However acceptance of pedophiles as a group does not mean blind trust of individuals. We decide, every time we meet someone or every time events give the opportunity for a relationship to move to a new level, how much we trust someone, the same would be true for pedophiles.

 

I have feelings of sadness for you now' date=' because you are going thru life not being able to fulfill your sexual desires. To say that you won't in the future is unknown and for that reason, I would wish you were never alone with kids.

 

I'm sorry, but this is how I feel about you.

 

Bettina[/quote'] Sounds to me like you have already accepted me in your own way.

[Bettina]

I think you're forgetting the new and arbitrary nature of the definition of adolescent, which is where we've stuck the sexually capable (biologically speaking) group of "children" who in every lower income area are adults and commonly marry. Not to mention the rather unscientific and inflamatory support of stigmatizing. It risks portraying you as insecure of your distance from a catagory when you admit to the prevelance of something near it, even defend that prevelance, but attack it all the same with an arguement that smacks of nothing but cheep sensationalism. Now I'm not defending criminals of this sort. I think there's a serious issue if those activities seem appropriate. But what I am saying is that "A more fitting label would be monsters" has absolutely no place on a forum pretending to be scientific.

 

First, could you please use the "quote" so I could know who you were replying to when you use the word "you"?

 

Second, since I have used the word "MONSTER" in this forum, to describe a person who is cruel, wicked, heinous and an inhuman child molester, I take some responsibility for entering that word into discussion even though its an acceptable word to use to describe this type of person. You can look that up in any dictionary.

 

Thirdly, this forum is not "pretending" to be all scientific. When I first came here it was for my interest in Cosmology, but I soon found out that most of the posters here are shooting way over my head with talk of string theory and the like. So, I tend to read more than post there....for now. So....I like the fact that I can go to other areas not so "scientific" and still remain in the same forum and join in discussion.

 

No offense, and you are undoubtedly intellegent, but I'm only a teenager, and you seem too strict and conforming a person that I would find difficulty in learning anything from, and I would like to.

 

Bettina

[5614]

But what I am saying is that "A more fitting label would be monsters" has absolutely no place on a forum pretending to be scientific.

 

1) Are we "pretending" to be scientific?

2) To be honest, it's not you who says what has a place and where.

3) Something doesn't have to be the image of the place it is in to be there anyway... what I mean is that a member's statement doesn't have to be scientific to fit in a science forum.

4) Freedom of speech.

5) Everyone is entitled to their opinion and on a forum where we are open to ideas & opinions etc their opinion is welcome.

[SoFarAway]

Fair enough. I agree that I was harsh in my opinion to your post and I'm sorry.

 

No worries.

 

Are you suggesting all peophiles should be recognized as harmless?

 

Certainly not. Is that what you think I said in my post? If so, please reread it.

 

How do you judge which ones should be called the "good wolves" in sheeptown.

 

How do you judge any person? Get to know the person and ascertain his/her individual character. Same applies to a pedophile.

 

Some know what they are, control it, and would never hurt a child.

 

I'm glad that you acknowledge that.

 

The last one, again, my own opinion, would be the type so tempted, that if babysitting a child and the child sat with him he would start getting "touchy" with him. He may not physically hurt the child, but his cheap feels may give that boy a complex that will remain with him for the rest of his life.....all for the pedophiles pleasure.

 

I interpret "the last one" to mean the type that acts out of malice and/or lacks sound judgement, or something along those lines. If that is the case then I agree; a careless or bad-intentioned pedophile or other person may harm a child.

 

Some may begin to understand you, but I will not compromise. I put all of you in the same basket and put it as far away from kids as possible.

 

Don't you think understanding is a logical step in solving a problem?

 

Do you still disagree with the reasoning set forth in my first post? If so, I'd still like to know what line of reasoning leads you to disagree. Do you think the stigma placed on pedophiles benefits humanity?

 

Let me try to clarify a bit. I think it would be beneficial to society as a whole if pedophiles were not so strongly stigmatized. Again, this does not mean a change in AoC laws, or that harming children be accepted. Nor does it mean that all pedophiles should be viewed as harmless, outstanding citizens. I think, though, that society should make an effort to better understand pedophiles and remove the generally unconditional hatred surrounding them. This would reduce the isolation they feel and lessen the psychological stress and damage they experience. The number of psychologically unbalanced people attracted to children would go down, and thus the number of sexual attacks against children would decrease.

 

I still welcome arguments from anyone who disagrees.

 

[subsequent post'] Thus the problem of being accepted. Since I can't tell whether you are a practicing pedophile (you could be lying) or a controlled one, I must place you in the same basket as the other types I've mentioned.

 

When you first meet someone do you discard the person as ilk since you don't know whether or not he/she is a good person?

[Callipygous]

Sounds to me like you have already accepted me in your own way.

 

i think thats just a difference in the definition of "accepted." the impression i have gotten throughout this thread is that she thinks you want to be accepted as in have your desires be considered socially acceptable. that wont happen. i think the kind of acceptance your talking about in this quote is her recognizing that your a person and accepting you as another human, that kind of acceptance can be expected. they are two different things. i accept the fact that your a person with friends and family and emotions and all that stuff, but i will never consider a relationship with a prepubescent person "acceptable".

[Dak]

i cant remember what it was in reference to or who said it, but i remember someone saying in another thread that the less well-treated and accepted you feel by society, the less inclined you are follow its rules and to do what is beneficial for society. so, if you feel that you are part of society and that you have benefited from this inclusion, you will be more likely to follow its rules and to do whats in the best interests of everyone as a whole (ie, refrain from sexual relationships with childeren).

 

if, however, you feel isolated and persecuted by society, then you can feel less obliged to obay its rules and keep its best interests at heart.

 

combined with the increased ease in which it would allow paedophiles to seek help/guidance, i can definately see the logic behind the idea that treating non-practicing paedophiles a little better would reduse the amount of child-abuse.

[Bettina]

No worries.

 

 

 

Certainly not. Is that what you think I said in my post? If so' date=' please reread it.

 

 

 

How do you judge any person? Get to know the person and ascertain his/her individual character. Same applies to a pedophile.

 

 

 

I'm glad that you acknowledge that.

 

 

 

I interpret "the last one" to mean the type that acts out of malice and/or lacks sound judgement, or something along those lines. If that is the case then I agree; a careless or bad-intentioned pedophile or other person may harm a child.

 

 

 

Don't you think understanding is a logical step in solving a problem?

 

Do you still disagree with the reasoning set forth in my first post? If so, I'd still like to know what line of reasoning leads you to disagree. Do you think the stigma placed on pedophiles benefits humanity?

 

Let me try to clarify a bit. I think it would be beneficial to society as a whole if pedophiles were not so strongly stigmatized. Again, this does not mean a change in AoC laws, or that harming children be accepted. Nor does it mean that all pedophiles should be viewed as harmless, outstanding citizens. I think, though, that society should make an effort to better understand pedophiles and remove the generally unconditional hatred surrounding them. This would reduce the isolation they feel and lessen the psychological stress and damage they experience. The number of psychologically unbalanced people attracted to children would go down, and thus the number of sexual attacks against children would decrease.

 

I still welcome arguments from anyone who disagrees.

 

 

 

When you first meet someone do you discard the person as ilk since you don't know whether or not he/she is a good person?[/quote']

 

You admitted you are a pedophile. What would your definition of a pedophile be as it pertains to you. Just curious.

 

Bettina

[GreenDestiny]

Well, of course not all people will act this way, but overall I agree with the argument - people who are not accepted and/or feel the hate of society might be less inclined to follow any rules or might even develop an anger towards society, which could result in negative behaviour. Also the inhibition threshold might be higher this way for people who feel that they don't have themselves under control and would need some help.

 

But for me the main reason for showing more acceptance is that it's simply better and fairer from a human perspective.

 

All in all I really don't see many reasons for the opposite position.

[Bettina]

Well you sound like your getting close to understanding. Well you're certainly right I could be lying and so could anyone else. Trust is something that has to be built and certainly no one here other then Denver01 knows me well enough to say what degree I maybe lying or not. However acceptance of pedophiles as a group does not mean blind trust of individuals. We decide' date=' every time we meet someone or every time events give the opportunity for a relationship to move to a new level, how much we trust someone, the same would be true for pedophiles.

 

Sounds to me like you have already accepted me in your own way.[/quote']

 

My dad and I like to watch science fiction and one particular star trek episode had Mr. Spock telling a story to Captain Kirk about being careful where he placed his trust. I don't remember it exactly, but I will come close.

 

There was a donkey and a scorpion standing at the edge of a fast moving river that they both wanted to cross. The donkey could cross easily, but he was blind and was afraid he would lose his bearings and drown. The Scorpion too, wanted to cross, but was too small and would drown too.

 

So, the scorpion told the donkey that if he could ride on his back, he could guide him and they would both be able to get to the other side. The donkey said, "No...you will sting me and I would drown", but the scorpion replied back, "If I sting you then I will drown too" The donkey agreed and with the scorpion on his back, they both began crossing.

 

Halfway across the river, the scorpion stung the donkey and as the paralyzed donkey and the scorpion began to drown, the surprised donkey asked "Why did you do that, now we will both drown"....to which the scorpion replied. "I know and I'm sorry....but its what I do".....

 

I may understand you now, but I cannot accept you.

 

Bettina

[Lance]

That was really deep.

[reverse]

You seem to be confusing "answered" with "replied to".

 

without trying to be a smart a**,

I’m seriously not sure what you want me to say.

 

Could you give me some sort of multi choice answers so I can pick one.

I don’t know what sort of perspective you are asking this question from so I cant really give you a good answer.

 

I think I can track the main thread and you as well.

 

Go for it.