What is a pedophile?

[reverse]

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

.

 

Well Mr Black,

I shouldn’t really indulge my scientific curiosity any more at your expense.

The questions I need to ask you now are of a personal nature.

I wish you strength in your weaker moments and urge you to remember the wrath of society.

 

thank you.

[Sayonara]

without trying to be a smart a**' date='

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.[/quote']

I'm simply curious about who the "we" is in that post of yours, that's all. On whose behalf were you speaking?

[reverse]

Oh I see.

 

Not really a person or people at all.

 

More an aspect of humanity or people.

 

The underlying instincts of parents and the like to protect their young.

 

and the way it galvanises people into group behaviour.

 

Do you have these instincts?

Because if you do,

I seriously don’t understand why you keep repeating the question.

 

I mean if I moderated a site with two Paedophiles on line as well as quite a few young people , the last thing I would be focusing my management skills upon would be some definition of some abstract group.

[Sayonara]

It's not a matter of abstract definition though is it? It's a matter of clarifying whether potential "them and us" attitudes are being brought into a thread that could explode at the drop of a hat.

 

But anyway, thanks for the answer.

[merico]

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' date=' 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[/quote']

 

That was really deap, and i've actually heard that before, I dont think any of the pedophiles who posted here believed we were going to get accepted for who we are, as that is a ridicules thing to ask from someone you hardly know. The reason I posted here was to show that we as pedophiles are not simply all "monsters" as you so put it, I am simply glad that even if only one person on this board understands that we are not all "monsters" and will not all hurt children the time, effort and risk of persicution were all worth while.

 

I really hope and it seems you have gained a deeper understanding of as and unerstands that we will not all hurt children wheather you accept us is something different that will not be accomplished any time soon.

 

I also hope the we have allowed you to see another perspective on the mattor in discussion as this would not have occured in any other situation.

 

Merico

[SoFarAway]

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

[/quote']

 

No problem at all.

 

is it like an obsession.

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

 

Hmm.. Well' date=' in my early teens, I'd say my attraction was a bit obsessive. I gradually outgrew that, though, by the age of 16 or so. Now, I'm 20 and my attraction to boys is a less controlling part of my life. But don't get me wrong; it is still a significant part.

 

Not sure what you mean on the magnetic compulsion thing. Concerning the feeling of attraction I have though, I'd say it's fairly similar to the feeling of attraction a heterosexual man feels toward a woman. In addition to the attraction, I feel a desire to fulfill something of an older brother or father type role for boys (and to a somewhat-lesser degree, children in general). I feel a yearning to protect and mentor them.

 

 

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

 

Interesting question. Even in my earliest memories, I recall holding a certain fascination with boys. This brings to mind an incident that occured in my kindergarten class (at the age of 5 or 6). While our teacher was out of the room, my classmates and I were discussing same-sex marriage (we didn't know it was taboo at the time). I remember proclaiming to the class that I was going to marry a particular boy that I liked. Anyway though, I'd say yes, I've always been drawn to boys.

 

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

 

Well' date=' up until this post, I hadn't really shared any experiences. But my motivation in posting here is to get people thinking, open people's minds a bit, and help non-pedophiles understand pedophiles better.

 

[subsequent post]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.

 

No, not really.

 

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

 

I'll take it you mean pedophile-related thoughts, which does cover a broad scope of things. It's hard to say. I guess about 10%, but that's just a rough figure off the top of my head.

[SoFarAway]

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

 

My definition of a pedophile as it pertains to me is the same as it pertains to anyone. I understand "pedophile" to simply mean an adult who is sexually attracted to children. Recall the footnote in my initial posting.

 

When I use the word "pedophile" or one of its variants, I am referring to an attraction, not necessarily a behavior.

[Bettina]

In addition to the attraction' date=' I feel a desire to fulfill something of an older brother or father type role for boys (and to a somewhat-lesser degree, children in general). I feel a yearning to protect and mentor them.

[/quote']

 

You have defined yourself as a man who is sexually attracted to little boys as described below in the medical definition.

 

Medical definition: A person who has "recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (age 13 years or younger)." Some pedophiles prefer males, others prefer females, and some are aroused by both males and females." Pedophiles do not necessarily act on their desires.

 

Why would you want to be a "scoutmaster" and be in the company of the very thing you yearn to have sex with. I just don't get it. If I were you, I would want to work in a senior center or something. Why do you want to tempt desire.

 

I can see no good in doing this. You have the capability of losing control with the temptations directly in front of you. I'm trying to be nice here and give you the benefit of the doubt, but I see a scorpion. An example, is that I've read about scoutmasters that have molested the very boys they are teaching.

 

If I had a say, I would not allow you to do this.

 

Bettina

[GreenDestiny]

Why would you want to be a "scoutmaster" and be in the company of the very thing you yearn to have sex with. I just don't get it. If I were you' date=' I would want to work in a senior center or something. Why do you want to tempt desire.

[/quote']

 

As I said before, it is not only about sex. When you are looking for a boyfriend, is sex really the most important thing for you? It can still be very rewarding to have a deep friendship with a boy or just be around boys and enjoy the time with them. After all, seeing a boy's smile is one of the best things on Earth. But I guess, that' just not that easy to understand for people who don't feel that way.

 

(Personally I wouldn't really want to be a "scoutmaster" though, as that is just not my kind of thing. I'd just want to get to know a single boy and develop a friendship with him.)

 

I can see no good in doing this. You have the capability of losing control with the temptations directly in front of you. I'm trying to be nice here and give you the benefit of the doubt, but I see a scorpion. An example, is that I've read about scoutmasters that have molested the very boys they are teaching.

 

Well, of course, how should you read about the scoutmasters who haven't molested the very boys they are teaching?

That would not be interesting enough for the news and also, no one will know that those scoutmasters are pedophiles, I guess. So one can't really make a statement about how many pedophile scoutmasters molest their scouts. Yes, there are some, but there are also people with other sexual attractions who commit crimes... what does it tell us?

[Bettina]

As I said before, it is not only about sex. When you are looking for a boyfriend, is sex really the most important thing for you? It can still be very rewarding to have a deep friendship with a boy or just be around boys and enjoy the time with them. After all, seeing a boy's smile is one of the best things on Earth. But I guess, that' just not that easy to understand for people who don't feel that way.

No....sex is not the only thing. I enjoy being with boys AND girls, but your analogy is not the same. If I hang around with a 17 yr old boy, who is my friend, there is no way I'm going to have sex with him because the "sexual attraction" is not there. Also, If for some strange reason I lose control and have sex with him (haven't yet) then morally (by teen standards) I have done nothing wrong. Apply this to you, and it would be adult on child which is morally wrong by any standard.

 

I'd just want to get to know a single boy and develop a friendship with him.)

said the scorpion to the donkey.......

Do you see where I'm coming from? You already want just a single boy....not girl.

 

Well, of course, how should you read about the scoutmasters who haven't molested the very boys they are teaching?

That would not be interesting enough for the news and also, no one will know that those scoutmasters are pedophiles, I guess. So one can't really make a statement about how many pedophile scoutmasters molest their scouts. Yes, there are some, but there are also people with other sexual attractions who commit crimes... what does it tell us?

 

I can't believe that you could befriend a little boy, the very thing that some part of you wants to love and have sex with, and become his friend and mentor without risk. Thats risk without a safety net. And without that, should a situation arise where you are alone with him, and he snuggles up to you, I believe you could and would take advantage. If you lose control the boy is damaged and please don't come back and tell me about willpower. That won't work for me.

 

Bettina

[ezekiel23]

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' date=' 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".....[/quote']That was really lame. I must admit I thought it was going to make a point, until the last line. SFN = science fiction network? Really Bettina, that was neither particularly thought provoking NOR deep. Just because you worded it like a parable, doesn't mean there's earth shatteringly philosophical undercurrents to it. Just because Leonard Nimoy read it in an all-knowing voice.

 

If the scorpian was head over heels in love with the donkey he would find it impossible to bring himself round to stinging him.

 

Apply this to you, and it would be adult on child which is morally wrong by any standard.

What about my standard.

 

One thing you keep talking about is this risk factor - what if, what if. Well, the truth of the matter is that varying degrees of risks are there for everybody, for everything. The same arguments you are using against us could equally effectively be used against you in reverse. You say "If you lose control" I say "If a boy loses control with you", you say "I can't believe that you could befriend a little boy, the very thing that some part of you wants to love and have sex with" I say ditto.

 

It's when you got to "I believe you could and would take advantage" that I really pricked up my ears - it's that would. Why is it that you feel able to make such an accusatory assumption? I'll tell you why, although I needn't as it's been said so many times before. It's because you've been conditioned to believe that sex is all paedophiles live for. If an adult and a child have sex, and they both enjoy it, what are the chances you will hear about it in a good light? Let's just say it's very very slim. And the inverse? High. You hear of it on the news, in the papers. Since birth you've been told, paedophiles want to have sex with and hurt children. It is no wonder that you err on the side of caution now. What you seem to conveniently forget is that as we speak, thousands upon thousands of paedophiles are working in the positions you dread them getting - working with and forming very close yet sexually abstinant friendships with underage children. Compare this with the number of cases of kiddie rape you hear about.

 

Yes it happens, but see the second paragraph up. There is no point arguring that there is a risk, because of course there is - one immdiately comparable to every other situation. Sounds cruel, almost too down to earth, and yes of course I wish with all my heart that it wasn't like that, but that's the way things are.

[Bettina]

That was really lame. I must admit I thought it was going to make a point' date=' until the last line. SFN = science fiction network? Really Bettina, that was neither particularly thought provoking NOR deep. Just because you worded it like a parable, doesn't mean there's earth shatteringly philosophical undercurrents to it. Just because Leonard Nimoy read it in an all-knowing voice.

If the scorpian was head over heels in love with the donkey he would find it impossible to bring himself round to stinging him.[/quote']

Sorry you didn't see my point. So....let me get this straight. Your saying if the pedophile has a trusted relationship with a little boy, then falls "head over heels in love" with him, he won't have sex? How do you know this.

 

What about my standard.

 

One thing you keep talking about is this risk factor - what if, what if. Well, the truth of the matter is that varying degrees of risks are there for everybody, for everything. The same arguments you are using against us could equally effectively be used against you in reverse. You say "If you lose control" I say "If a boy loses control with you", you say "I can't believe that you could befriend a little boy, the very thing that some part of you wants to love and have sex with" I say ditto.

Not the same argument. With me, it would be two same age teens who KNOW THE RISKS. I could point that out to him or make him back off. I can reason with him why its not the right time. The other way it would be the ADULT who knows the risk, but the little boy doesn't. He may not know what is right and could easily be talked into believing it is.

But, to go further, say the boy and I do have sex. It will not hurt me mentally or MORALLY.

It's when you got to "I believe you could and would take advantage" that I really pricked up my ears - it's that would. Why is it that you feel able to make such an accusatory assumption? I'll tell you why, although I needn't as it's been said so many times before. It's because you've been conditioned to believe that sex is all paedophiles live for. If an adult and a child have sex, and they both enjoy it, what are the chances you will hear about it in a good light? Let's just say it's very very slim. And the inverse? High. You hear of it on the news, in the papers. Since birth you've been told, paedophiles want to have sex with and hurt children. It is no wonder that you err on the side of caution now. What you seem to conveniently forget is that as we speak, thousands upon thousands of paedophiles are working in the positions you dread them getting - working with and forming very close yet sexually abstinant friendships with underage children. Compare this with the number of cases of kiddie rape you hear about.

 

Yes it happens, but see the second paragraph up. There is no point arguring that there is a risk, because of course there is - one immdiately comparable to every other situation. Sounds cruel, almost too down to earth, and yes of course I wish with all my heart that it wasn't like that, but that's the way things are.

 

When Sayonara reopened this thread, I thought he was a jerk. But now, I know he wasn't. By reopening it, I got a feel for what the pedophile is going through and I have said so. I really do feel bad for you. I have come a long way from calling you a (self censored) and I am learning.

 

But if someone can show me data that its ok to mix wolves and baby sheep then I will change my mind. Maybe it happens, but not as the norm and stop trying to compare teen vs teen, adult vs adult, with adult vs child. It doesn't work...at least not in my school.

 

I'm sorry you feel threatened. It was not my intention.

 

Bettina

[merico]

When Sayonara reopened this thread' date=' I thought he was a jerk. But now, I know he wasn't. By reopening it, I got a feel for what the pedophile is going through and I have said so. I really do feel bad for you. I have come a long way from calling you a (self censored) and I am learning.

 

Bettina[/quote']

 

I wasnt going to post tonight as im not in the mood but i just read this and felt that it deserved recognition. I am so glad u have came to understand our point, thanks. Please dont take this as offencive but when u started posting on this thread u had along with others some very sterotyped views, and i am reall glad u have came to understand what we are trying to say.

 

thanks very much for listening and understanding.

 

Maybe it happens, but not as the norm and stop trying to compare teen vs teen, adult vs adult, with adult vs child. It doesn't work...at least not in my school.

 

Your right BL is not the norm, nor in my opinion will it ever be, and also as u said it is very hard to compare teen vs teen, adult vs adult, with adult vs child as there are just to many variables to comprehend. But what i believe he was trying to put forward in his post was that there are risks in any situation and in any relationships, just as there are in bl relationships.

 

thanks for listening

merico

[GreenDestiny]

I can't believe that you could befriend a little boy' date=' the very thing that some part of you wants to love and have sex with, and become his friend and mentor [b']without risk[/b]. Thats risk without a safety net. And without that, should a situation arise where you are alone with him, and he snuggles up to you, I believe you could and would take advantage. If you lose control the boy is damaged and please don't come back and tell me about willpower. That won't work for me.

 

When arguing this way you have to keep in mind that there are always risks in life, whatever you do. Just imagine you were in a relationship where your boyfriend didn't want to have sex at the moment (maybe he feels he isn't yet ready for it or he just doesn't want to have premarital sex) - there'd also be the risk that you might just get so horny that you would force him to do it. Or if this doesn't sound realistic, just turn the situation the other way round with the boy forcing you.

 

But would you really do that to someone you love? I think it is very unlikely. Yes, you never have absolute 100% certainty in life, but that doesn't mean that you are in imminent danger of seriously doing harm to someone, especially someone you love. Actually, I happen to believe in willpower and of course I wouldn't want to hurt someone who is most important to me. How could I live with that afterwards?

 

Of course you just assume that I would do that anyway. You don't know me and you don't even say I could do that, no, you are just certain I am a "scorpion" and would do it, without any basis for this thesis whatsoever. You just think that's simply the way all pedophiles are (scorpions), but what makes you so sure? I even posted information showing that only 5% of all child sexual abuse is being committed by pedophiles.

[Bettina]

When arguing this way you have to keep in mind that there are always risks in life, whatever you do. Just imagine you were in a relationship where your boyfriend didn't want to have sex at the moment (maybe he feels he isn't yet ready for it or he just doesn't want to have premarital sex) - there'd also be the risk that you might just get so horny that you would force him to do it. Or if this doesn't sound realistic, just turn the situation the other way round with the boy forcing you.

You are comparing the exact scenario that I already said you couldn't compare. teen on teen vs adult on child. We are both old enough to know the consequences. Its not in the same category as adult on child.Its not the same thing.

But would you really do that to someone you love? I think it is very unlikely. Yes, you never have absolute 100% certainty in life, but that doesn't mean that you are in imminent danger of seriously doing harm to someone, especially someone you love. Actually, I happen to believe in willpower and of course I wouldn't want to hurt someone who is most important to me. How could I live with that afterwards?

Again, you can't make the comparison, but to answer it, If I loved him, and I know he loved me, and I wanted to have sex with him, I could, and would, make him cave.

Of course you just assume that I would do that anyway. You don't know me and you don't even say I could do that, no, you are just certain I am a "scorpion" and would do it, without any basis for this thesis whatsoever. You just think that's simply the way all pedophiles are (scorpions), but what makes you so sure? I even posted information showing that only 5% of all child sexual abuse is being committed by pedophiles.

5% of those REPORTED. Look how long the pedophile priests went unnoticed. 20 years in some cases.

I'm sorry, but the simple fact is that by medical definion a pedophile is sexually attracted to children. Otherwise he wouldn't be a pedophile. Don't try to slide in "boy lover" to dilute it, because that won't work either.

I mean no disrespect to any of you. I have a changed opinion, but since I can't distinguish who is good or bad, The only logical choice is to group you all together.

 

Another way. If I reached into a group of Pedophiles, (I have weeded out murderers, monsters, and the like first) and grabbed one of you to babysit a very cute little boy for a week in a remote cabin in the woods, I will have a man who is sexually attracted to children babysitting a cute little boy. How can his parents logically not worry. If I was doing the babysitting, and it was a little boy or girl, the parents would have no worries.

 

The scorpion is a scorpion and even if I trained some not to sting, I would put them all in the same box before I went to bed. I don't want to offend any of you. I have a new appreciation of what your going thru, but you have to realize that because of what you are, (god given) you have the potential to do harm even though it does not exist now.

 

Bettina

[klanger]

I think what we struggle with here is the actual word "pedophile" and what that cungures up in our minds. I was just like Bettina in my though pattern towards them, the word bought to my mind a lot of suffering and harm done to children. I kept seeing the faces of all the little girls that had been taken from their families sexually abused raped and murdered... these were the images I saw thought of and got angry about everytime a pedophile made comment in here which lead me to be totally blinkered to what they were saying. I now think that my initial reaction was wrong, I dont agree with adults having sex with children that is not what I am saying.

 

I had been reading what they were saying, and suddenly the penny dropped! I want to share my reasoning behind the change of mind with all of you in here, I am going to use my own analagy which ultimately lead to my realisation that the word pedophile is not a straight black and white word.

 

I am not stating actual statistics here just a random figure for the purposes of my analogy ok.

 

Lets say that 50% of the population regularly read porn magazines, the reader gases down at the pictures of naked men or women in all sorts of guises, I believe the scene setting for each series of pictures are based on a fantasy, be it a girl getting down and grubby on the farm or a mechanic in a car work shop getting ready to service you, hehehe just bear with me please.

 

So 50% of the population are reading these mags, going along with the fantasy of what they are looking at in their minds. Now out of that 50% lets say that 5% have a fantasy of rape, either commiting it themselves or having it done to themselves by another person or even a group of people. That 5% view it as purely a means of escape in their minds and a way to release sexual tension. It is a turn on for them, the rape in their mind isnt as rape actually is, its more of a "noooooooo....mmmmm oh god stop! mmmmm oh yeah!" It is purely ficticious, and the person being raped in this fantasy isnt really being hurt and are actually enjoying it.

 

Now out of that 5% lets say 1% REALLY gets off on rape and is agressive about and hungers for it all the time, till in the end they go out and take advantage of a situation that may present itself to actually commit a rape.

 

So what do you have? 50% that read porn, 5% that fantasise about rape and 1% that will go out and do it...... do we label all porn readers as rapists? NO. Do we label 5% of them as rapists? NO The only person that is an actual rapist is the 1% that went out and commited it.

 

This is how I came to the conclusion that to call everyone that maybe looks at naked pictures of children a "pedophile" is to actually brand them as a monster that would go ahead and do the deed, and we have seen quite clearly from their comments in here, that this isnt the case. For them it is a desire no different from any other sexual fantasy. I would never say that all porn readers are rapists, so by the same measure I have to give the same credit to the pedophiles we have in here with us, I just dont think they should be called "pedophile" because that implies that they will do those things to children.

 

I think for most people their own personal sexual fantasies are purely fantasy, something that is kept in their minds and used as a means within themselves to achieve orgasm or or heighten a sexual experience, I dont think there are very many people who would actually go out there and re-enact those fantasies.

 

Guys? you need to find a new name for yourselves, pedophile somehow to me seems too harsh and inacurate.

[Baldur]

I think they should be identified early and isolated from the general population. This would mean a form of incarceration for offenders that are relatively young.

 

What are your thoughts on who these people are and how we can identify and help them while protecting children?

 

It's really quite simple. Starting at about age 4, and on a yearly basis, give all boys a penile plethysmograph and all girls a vaginal photoplethysmograph while showing them pictures of men and women, boys and girls. Incarcerate all those who show a sexual response to boys or girls.

 

Then, gradually expand the work hours per week and increase taxes, because it will take a lot of money to support the half of the population that you put in prison.

 

 

Baldur

[Baldur]

Wow! what a change! I read the first 40 posts, and until post 36 all I found were outrageous lies and/or misconceptions, then I read the last 30-some posts, and find that the situation has changed quite a bit.

 

I should also note that I tried posting here on Science Forums about this subject last January, and my posts were deleted without comment.

 

For the record, I'm a girl lover. Incidentally, Bettina, if that pic is of you, you are very beautiful - at the beginning of this thread I would have said only beautiful on the outside, but with your recent posts I am beginning to think you are beautiful on the inside too - only woefully misinformed. In any case, I would never want to have an intimate relationship with you - or any girl - unless it was mutual. Furthermore, in the current legal climate I refrain from such relationships because of the great potential for harm caused by a society that fears love.

 

I would also like to speak on behalf of the boy lovers here. When I was nine I met a very nice older gentleman who even then I had a feeling was a boylover. While he has never actually said as much, as the years have gone by I am more and more certain that he IS a boy lover. He is one the kindest and most intelligent men I have ever known, and I still keep in touch with him. He never tried to do anything untoward with me - even when I spent several days at his house as a guest, when I was 13 - and he always respected me.

 

As far as I'm concerned, he's worth a million moralists.

 

And not only am I not attracted to men, I'm not even attracted to many adults!

 

While I'm here, y'all might be interested in a link that I posted elsewhere on this board, about neoteny. It is a theory that might explain the evolution of pedophilia. In fact, us child lovers may well be the reason humans developed intelligence!

 

http://www.davidbrin.com/neotenyarticle1.html

 

You may also find the following links useful, if they have not been mentioned earlier in this thread (with over 500 messages, I could hardly read all of them at once!):

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rind_et_al.

 

http://www.tc.umn.edu/~under006/Library/Antisexuality.html

 

 

 

Baldur

[Kylonicus]

Don't Tell Us These Things, We Don't Want To Know.

 

 

Arrrrggghhhhh.

 

Heres One Arguement For While Pedophilia Isn't Longterm, True Love. Children Grow Up! Will You Still Want Them When They Are All Grown Up?

 

It Just Sickens Me That This Is Even A Topic Arrrgggghhh.

[reverse]

Bettina' date=' that was neither particularly thought provoking NOR deep.

 

If the scorpian was .....[/quote']

 

I disagree.

I goes to prove a well understood aspect of human nature, passed down through the ages in a form that you just don’t happen to like.

[Dak]

Don't Tell Us These Things' date=' We Don't Want To Know.

 

 

Arrrrggghhhhh.

 

Heres One Arguement For While Pedophilia Isn't Longterm, True Love. Children Grow Up! Will You Still Want Them When They Are All Grown Up?

 

It Just Sickens Me That This Is Even A Topic Arrrgggghhh.[/quote']

 

if we dont assess our thoughts and attetudes, then how can we know that they are correct? and if they are not correct, how would we ever find out?

 

if our attitude towards paedophiles is correct, then it will stand up to the paedophiles comments and we'll come out of this conversation being more sure that our attetude is correct.

 

if our attetude towards paedophiles is incorrect and in need of change, then maybe we will come out of this conversation realising that.

 

if our thoughts, attetudes and oppinions were never put up for analysis, then wed still be living in a world that

 

#prohibited homosexuality

#forsed women to stay at home and cook

#enslaved black people

#burnt everyone who isnt christian, and quite a few of the ones who are, at the stake

#allowed rich people to completely disreguard the law.

#etc

 

im not saying that we should nessessaraly change our oppinion about paedophiles - just that we should at least consider the issue, as opposed to just blindly accepting that an instinktive hatred and shunning of them is some kind of moral axiom.

 

thinking about stuff, and talking about stuff, is inportant -- especially if you consider that, in this case, an incorrect attetude by society towards paedophillia (be it too condeming or not condeming enough) could result in more child abuse that if society had the correct attetude.

 

i'll finish by echoing sayo's advise: if you dont like the fact that this topic is being discussed here, then dont read this thread.

[reverse]

It's really quite simple.

Baldur

Sir.

you're not really helping your cause.

As a pragmatic member of society,

when it comes to removing antisocial elements I know that the following methods are available.

 

acceptance.

non acceptance.

punishment.

imprisonment.

hospitalisation

Medication.

Death.

 

Sir, may I ask for your opinion on Michael Jackson?

[reverse]

 

if our thoughts' date=' attetudes and oppinions were never put up for analysis, then wed still be living in a world that

 

#prohibited homosexuality

#forsed women to stay at home and cook

#enslaved black people

#burnt everyone who isnt christian, and quite a few of the ones who are, at the stake

#allowed rich people to completely disreguard the law.

#etc

 

.[/quote']

 

and that would be bad how?

 

sorry Dack, couldn’t resist that.

I just get really bored listening to people talking about their hobbies,

even if it is a hobbie that some would regard evil and twisted.

 

I think the Mods can watch the Pedo's with the younger members of the forum, I'm going off to build some furniture.

 

later.

[Coral Rhedd]

For the record' date=' I'm a girl lover. Incidentally, Bettina, if that pic is of you, you are very beautiful - at the beginning of this thread I would have said only beautiful on the outside, but with your recent posts I am beginning to think you are beautiful on the inside too - only woefully misinformed.

[/quote']

 

LOL, Bettina! How does it feel to have a scorpion wave his tail at you.

[ezekiel23]

I wasnt going to post tonight as im not in the mood but i just read this and felt that it deserved recognition. I am so glad u have came to understand our point, thanks. Please dont take this as offencive but when u started posting on this thread u had along with others some very sterotyped views, and i am reall glad u have came to understand what we are trying to say.

 

thanks very much for listening and understanding.

First of all I would just like to say how much in agreement I am with merico here. I really do thank everybody whole heartedly for being so open minded and understanding! I realise I may be pushing you now with the arguments I'm about to put forward, but please be aware that part of this is really more about me loving a nice tough debate than anything else And, you lot can take it

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showpost.php?p=160841&postcount=562

I'm glad you replied like that, actually. When I said "One thing you keep talking about" in my last post, I was then going to move onto the second thing, but I got tired of writing, and don't want to get back into this thread too actively anyway.

 

The second thing I have noticed you basing arguments on is morals. You even highlighted the word morals. But, what is your definition of moral? (On a side note, I am just interested, what is your definition of 'ready for sex'? And you keep talking about risks - which risks did you mean specifically?) My definition of a moral argument is one that is right, one that is humane. The dictionary.com definition can be found here http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=moral. How vague these are. They seem to me very opinionated, leaving what is and what isn't moral very open to flexibility.

 

This also means that morals are taught or learned and can be changed. I did of course think in a very similar way to you until my body forced me to change my view. The human mind can be programmed - just look at the differences between people in the western world, and suicide bombers coming out of the muslim countries in the middle east. It can be made to believe whatever anyone wants it to believe with sufficient training. The difference between fundamentalists and atheists. We learn what society teaches us as we grow up. Now, I'm not claiming that my view is right and the generally accepted one is wrong of course, because by the very argument I'm using for I'd be being hypocritical. What I'm saying is that, SOMETIMES, just sometimes, I think the no-exceptions way society likes to deal with stigma such as paedophilic sexual relationships is illogical, and I'm hoping that you will come to agree with me.

 

Am I correct in saying that one reason people are against the idea of an adult/child sexual relationship is that it is immoral? That argument doesn't make sense though; what is moral and what is immoral changes over time. A quick think back to the ancient civilisations will convince us of this. And, while it comes into the equation, no, I'm not only talking about paedophilic sex, although it was apparently rife in ancient Greece for example. What about the public entertainment enjoyed by thousands courtesy of the colluseum. What about human sacrifices to the gods. What about canibalism that exists even in the world today. These things that would seem perfectly natural and moral to one person would seem shockingly immoral and un-PC to us. It is no use saying "but blatent murder IS immoral!" because that is then your opinion. It is no use saying "But the people being killed never wanted to die!" Because the subject matter here is actually sex between an adult and a child, and in a consensual relationship neither side is at all averse to said behaviour. It is no use saying "But there never is such a relationship!" because there are. From what I've heard and read, in a tiny percentage of cases, boys will willingly participate in sexual activity. And, were it legal and accepted and all the rest, I wish I could go out and find people, because really, that is the one thing that is stopping me providing a firm and conclusive argument on this topic.

 

Let's look at another scenario. A paedophile and a kid have a sexual relationship. Kid's parents find out and take paedophile to court. Kid however was totally nonchant about having a sexual relationship with this guy and in fact rather enjoyed it, being pre pubic and with few inhibitions as far as sexual inclination is concerned. Despite parents' indoctrination to do otherwise, kid still testifies that everything was fine. But the law doesn't care - the parents are the legal guardians of the child, and the paedophile has obviously comitted a crime and so receives a heavy sentence. Tough. The next case in the court is somebody who's been arrested for violence, after breaking somebody's arm by attacking them with a baseball bat. Woah, but wait a minute! The person whose arm was broken turns out to have burgled their house and threatened them with a gun. Ya, hang on, this guy is innocent after all, you're free to go mate.

 

Huh? The guy who committed the worse moral offence got off without a sentence

 

Ya so guys, I'm back and arguing pro sex stronger and more obviously than ever. Ooh nah, all you police forces out there had better keep a tag on me. Not really, actually. As people have rightly said, please note that I am arguing from my point of view, and to change opinions. For safety's sake, I clarify, this does not mean that I will go out and have sex with any boys. It is my opinion. My opinion. opinion. You are free to say you don't believe me until you're blue in the face, but I am telling you now, even if it were legal, I would never deliberately initiate sexual contact with or try to convince a boy to have sex with me. Since it is illegal, I never will. And even if it wasn't, I would never even think about it unless I was 100% certain he was willing. Why do I think like that? Because - everybody is different! I think here is another direct parallel with 'normal relationhips'. Would you ever have sex with somebody who didn't want to have sex with you? 'nuff said.

 

So, am I doing this for selfish reasons? Course! I doubt many boys would get anything like the same level of enjoyment out of sex with me than I would with them. I doubt many of them would really be at all bothered if it never happened. Just, don't get the idea that I am at all happy living as a paedophile today, and I know it is the same for many other people, driving some as far as suicide. Now obviously I've never gone quite that far! But it happens in phases, on and off I feel so unhappy as a paedophile that I never want to go there again. I guess you can't know what effect complete sexual repression has until you experience it first hand. All this arguing about sex is an extra - I do sincerely thank you for considering what we have to say and don't wish anybody to think that my arguing in this direction invalidates what has already been said. If you can convince me that I am wrong, I would of course admit defeat.

 

Another difference between an adult/adult and an adult/child relationship differs from an adult/adult is the imbalance of power present. Depending on the maturity of the child, I believe this imbalance places much of the responsibility for the child's welfare on the adult. As you keep saying, children are often naively unaware of things adults would immediately steer away from. This tells me that, in an adult/child relationship, it is the adult who has the responsibility of deciding what and when something should be done. This screams of advantage taking and excuse making, of course. "I THOUGHT s/he wouldn't mind!" "But s/he said yes! [i.e. was pestered into saying yes]" "It was my responsibility, she might not be so sure now, but by my judgement s/he'll look back in years to come and won't mind!" I don't mean it that way. What I mean is that it puts the whole responsibility on the adult to keep the child safe - if anything goes wrong, no excuses, at the end of the day it's entirely his or her fault!

 

Let's now look at the idea of taking on responsibility from the angle of a world in which paedophilia is totally accepted. I have a young freind called Jack. Because paedophilia is accepted and understood, Jack's parents know all about me and what I think about Jack. Even Jack himself is all too aware. In fact, my freinds are aware of my relationship with the kid and some of Jack's freinds too. Because Jack has been brought up in a world acceptant of paedophilia, he knows all about it, it's nothing special; he knows that I want sex with him. But he's told people that the idea of any sort of sex actually rather frightens him, and he wouldn't want it at all. He's told me that too. Think about the position that puts me in - if I initiated anything, how could that count as anything but rape? The responsibility is now dispersed and shared between not only me and the boy - but the boy has many more openings to spot if anything is going wrong and ask other people for help much earlier.

 

You see, I think one of the problems with what I am arguing about is that acceptance of adult/child sex would be much easier if everyone was already acceptant of paedophilia - without that additional factor, there are so many corners that can trip up the arguments it becomes almost impossible to rationalise. If everyone was acceptant of paedophilia and the sex that came with it, the situation would be so different. The worry of rape would be greatly diminished. The burden put on kids to keep that sort of relationship a secret is lifted. Risk of rape still wouldn't be zero, but it would be reduced. In other words, I'm going back to my previous posts about risk factor being present in every situation, no matter which sexuality you're on about.

 

One worry I have with the legalisation of adult/child sex is the transmission of STDs. This is the one point for which I cannot think of a satisfactory workaround. Because of their naivity and trusting nature, it would of course be dead easy for children to pick these things up without a second thought. And to wreck their own lives in the process. Not everyone is the same - just because I say I will act in one way and keep to my word, no disrespect to ANYBODY of course, but I can be quite sure that not everybody will! From my own viewpoint, I can say that yes, I am quite sure that I haven't picked one up yet! And in this respect, I wouldn't present a problem to any children if I ever had sex with one. However, had I picked one up somewhere, how easy would it be for me to lie about it?! Hmmm. I am not at all sure how to talk round this one.

 

My second worry is that kids might not be treated with the respect they deserve in all situations. How embarassing would it be - say society finally changed its mind about paedophilia, and tomorrow it was all OK. We then hear of scandals about people using children for sex - conning them into it then discarding them. Not by everybody, but by some people. A child is obviously not a life partner. I know that I would always treat kids with respect. But would everybody? As another parallel to ordinary relationships, we hear of violence, high divorce rates, virtual 'enslavement' of women. Where has that love gone, I ask? That would be a terrible knock for a child, who might get a kick from being treated specially and having sex or whatever, then being deserted...like a prostitute. Much different from an adult, who would be able to put it behind them much more easily. Or am I worrying too much? I don't know. I don't want to be deprived of something for what other people MIGHT do, but then again I would hate to see what other people might do actually happening. *sigh*

 

But if someone can show me data that its ok to mix wolves and baby sheep then I will change my mind. Maybe it happens, but not as the norm and stop trying to compare teen vs teen, adult vs adult, with adult vs child. It doesn't work...at least not in my school.

Heh, well, I never claimed it was the norm. I don't deny it's not the norm, by any stretch of the imagination. I only said it's not ALWAYS wrong. Yes, partially for my own horribly selfish benefit. But if I and many others believe something we think is correct and can be backed up by real life evidence, I feel entitled to debate it until somebody can convince me otherwise.

 

Not the same argument. With me, it would be two same age teens who KNOW THE RISKS. I could point that out to him or make him back off. I can reason with him why its not the right time. The other way it would be the ADULT who knows the risk, but the little boy doesn't. He may not know what is right and could easily be talked into believing it is.

But, to go further, say the boy and I do have sex. It will not hurt me mentally or MORALLY.

I have already talked about morals, responsibility and balance of power. If an adult needs to a talk a kid into having sex, then I think that is very wrong and indeed irresponsible. If an adult imposes sex on or knows they present a definite risk to a child by having sex with them, then that is also irresponsible. Most certainly, if an adult harms a child through lack of care and thought, even slightly, I agree that this is an inexcusable offence.

 

Sorry you didn't see my point. So....let me get this straight. Your saying if the pedophile has a trusted relationship with a little boy, then falls "head over heels in love" with him, he won't have sex? How do you know this.

 

No, because I personally don't agree that sex is either inevitable or necessarily harmful. I don't equate the sting with sex, which is why the story does not illustrate to me what it does to you. What I was saying was that a deadly sting is hardly an expression of love, even if both animals died in the process. If an adult and a child have sex, if it is consensual and both are comfortable, it is unlikely that one or the other will need to be hurt. If you were having sex with your boyfreind, and are being hurt in the process I am sure he would notice and stop immediately to put you out of any pain.

 

In fact, love has nothing to do with that really, does it. If any (innocent! my brother doesn't count LOL) individual was in pain due to something somebody was doing, would not anybody stop? Above all, if I was hurting a boy I loved, I would feel utterly compelled to stop.

 

The more I discuss this topic, the more I lean towards the view that society is creating its own problem with adult/child sex - you try and suppress something as powerful as love, in technical terms, it is only naturally gonna come back to bite ya in the ass...

 

I goes to prove a well understood aspect of human nature, passed down through the ages in a form that you just don’t happen to like.

How does it prove anything? It just states something happened. That proves nothing.

 

Will You Still Want Them When They Are All Grown Up?

Sure, although the sexual attraction is lost. This hasn't happened to me yet, but people this has happened to say they retain a platonic love for their kids as they grow older, somthing that goes deeper than a simple friendship. The best analogy I can think of to explain this is, I guess, like a parent's love for a child.

 

Sir, may I ask for your opinion on Michael Jackson?

I would be inclined not to talk about MJ. He clearly isn't entirely normal, in more ways than just sexuality, and is really a bad comparison to make to the rest of us. To me, it seems obvious that he is a paedophile, however adamently he denies it to the media, (for good reason, of course). I don't think anybody can really give an opinion on this topic, as there are so many lies and so much elaboration floating around about it that the only person who knows what's really happening is MJ himself.

 

My personal opinion, however, is that, he's a lunatic if he thinks he can be a superstar world famous entertainer and also get away with doing something that is considered one of the ultimate taboos of modern society.