|
Kajeesus posted:The admittedly few self-admitted pedophiles I've encountered online have all been creepy goonlords that I wouldn't trust around children regardless of their attraction. If pedophilia were destigmatized and I knew a non-rapey pedophile, I'd probably trust them around children the same way I trust people to not commit rape in any other situation. A thought about why this might be. Since pedophilia carries the stigma that it does, wouldn't it be only the most fundamentally dysfunctional people with that attraction be the ones to openly admit it, since they might not fully grasp how reprehensible it is considered? This might explain why it only seems to be the creepy-rear end people that are so easily identified (or those that admit it). The attraction might be far more wide spread than is ordinarily assumed, but that many of those with said attraction might be covering it up with things like schoolgirl porn (since that was brought up above).
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:11 |
|
|
Caros posted:Actually it is subjectively a wrong thing, which is sort of my point. Absent belief in god (at which point you might still be in the wrong on child marriage judging by the old testament) any claim that something is objectively wrong is throwing darts blindfolded. Murder might be objectively wrong, but it's also possible that the objective morality of the universe is that murder is a good thing because the goal of all life is death or some crazy poo poo. Interesting (yet gross) side point to the subjectivity of the topic: until the 70's or some such, pedophilic porn was produced to be sold right alongside other forms of porn. The hard taboo on pedophilia seems to be a far more recent thing (progressing to abhorrence with the further development of the concept of consent) than does the hate that homosexuality got for such a long time. Attitudes regarding both have clearly changed within living memory, indicating the subjectivity of them (indicating nothing regarding the morality of either, of course (issues of power/consent handle that for pedophilia anyway)).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:So what you're saying is that we need to imprison all left handed people? The South-Paw: artistic, empathic, pedophilic.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Where do you live that the age of consent is high? I don't know many places where it's higher than 16. Looks like a lot of Africa has 18 as their age of consent. Additionally, Bahrain seems to be 21. Also the U.S. is mostly 18.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I thought the US was all over the place ranging from 21 to like 12 or something? Or did they change that? Wikipedia posted:Each U.S. state (and the District of Columbia) has its own general age of consent. Currently state laws set the age of consent at 16, 17, or 18. The most common age is 16,[20] a common age of consent in most other Western countries. Less than 50% of the U.S. population resides in states which set the age of consent at 16; these states are usually smaller than states which set the ages of consent at 17 and 18 and therefore have lower populations. Whether Texas's age of consent is defined as 17 or 18, over 60% of the U.S. population resides in states which have ages of consent as 16 and/or 17.[6] It used to be all over the place (140 years ago, it seems 10-12 was common with Delaware being 7), but has been at least 16 in every state since 2001.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
Black Baby Goku posted:If you cared about the victims at all, you would be for lowering the amount of predators out there. Therapy isn't cutting it. You saw the pose from the guy who worked with them. They use any excuse possible to be near children. Just to be clear, you're up for offing this pedo too, right? http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/schoolboy-groomed-teaching-assistant-we-6536549
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
Funky See Funky Do posted:It's going to be an absolute nightmare to study properly. I can't imagine many non-offending non-registered paedophiles signing up for it. So right off the bat your sample is skewed towards people that have abused a child and been caught. "Hi, we're conducting some research. Are you a person that the vast majority of people would be happy to lynch? Come to building 1A Science University! We super swear it's not a trap." You are absolutely correct, which is why there were arguments for attempting to reduce the stigma of it so it could actually be studied in such a way. If you use only the currently known pedophiles, like offenders in prison or people trading child porn, you might only be the population segment representing pedophilias extreme end. To liken this to the heter/homosexual comparison that (even in this thread) ignores sexual spectrum or things like bisexality, there might well be a similarly ignored spectrum, wherein the people falling to the far side of pedo have sole attraction to minors and people on the other side total sexual repulsion, with most pedophiles falling in the middle and so typically non-offending. If they can't come forward, the problem might seem to remain binary when it might well not be, and treating or interviewing that other segment might provide insights into better treatment than incarceration.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:Reason such as what, race? What does Japan has that England, US, India and South Africa doesn't? Japanese culture, basically.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2015 05:43
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:First of all, pedophilia is understood in psychology and psychiatry to be a paraphilia, not a sexual orientation. It is like other paraphilias, and other paraphilias are like pedophilia. In addition, only attraction to people under the age of 15 is considered to be a pathological paraphilia in need of psychological treatment to prevent people from acting on it. I would just like to point out here that psychological and psychiatric definitions are subject to swings as more research is done in or consideration given to an area, the most famous example being homosexuality being a "sociopathic personality disorder" right along side sexual sadism and pedophilia in the DSM 1, with it being reclassified to a paraphilia (sexual deviation) in DSM 2, that being revised to a sexuality in 1973 due to protests and further study. Given the fluidity of psychiatric definitions as further study is done, it may not always be the best place from which to base an argument.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:People are using psychiatry to begin with, so they can either know what the current understanding is, or offer an alternative. Agreed. And some people are offering potential alternatives, or at least calling for a reduction in stigma in an attempt to increase the likelihood of further research being done. And others are calling for mass killings or castration (which seems to assume only men are pedophiles as well). Cause, ya know, moderation is a thing here...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:11 |
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:we'd cut someone's liver out if it was cancerous and harmful to their ability to live, why not do the same with their sexuality? See, the difference there is that we don't just cut out their liver. Tezzor posted:By grownup talk do you mean handwringing over appeals to nature, or crying about the stigma unfairly attached to being a broken freak who wants to rape children? I'm not sure where the maturity lies in refusal to do mean things that actually solve problems. So, say we were to find a causative link between being the victim of child sexual abuse and becoming a perpetrator, would you be up for executing both parties at the same time? Hypothetically, of course. I'm just checking for moral consistency here.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2015 23:26
|
|