Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-08-2019, 04:44 PM
jebert is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 734

Lgbtq... Y ~p?


In the US the LGBTQ community has become increasingly accepted by the general public over the last few years. I believe that this is due to increased recognition that this is the way these people are, or if you prefer, "that's the way God made them." It is not something they made a conscious decision about one day. Although discrimination is still somewhat common, we no longer criminalize these people or their behavior.

However, this is not the case with pedophilia. Their behavior is reviled and criminalized because the victims are legally (and, depending on age, intellectually and emotionally) unable to give informed consent. This is as it should be. But even those who are sexually attracted to children but never commit sexual acts are still vilified. Viewing child pornography is a criminal offense even though no child is directly involved in the act of viewing. The CREATION of child porn definitely harms children and should incur very stiff criminal penalties. But the viewing? Or the passive attraction?

So it is a logical inconsistency that we accept LGBTQ but make pariahs of P. After all, are they not the way God made them, too? I am personally reviled by pedophiles on an emotional basis, but can't come up with a logical basis for that vilification. How do we resolve this contradiction?
  #2  
Old 08-08-2019, 04:50 PM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is offline
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 37,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by jebert View Post

However, this is not the case with pedophilia. Their behavior is reviled and criminalized because the victims are legally (and, depending on age, intellectually and emotionally) unable to give informed consent. This is as it should be. But even those who are sexually attracted to children but never commit sexual acts are still vilified. Viewing child pornography is a criminal offense even though no child is directly involved in the act of viewing. The CREATION of child porn definitely harms children and should incur very stiff criminal penalties. But the viewing? Or the passive attraction?
Viewing creates a demand for more material which creates new victims. And the continuing victimization of the subjects of older material.
  #3  
Old 08-08-2019, 04:57 PM
Miller's Avatar
Miller is online now
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 44,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by jebert View Post
I am personally reviled by pedophiles...
You know you've screwed up in life when you're reviled by pedophiles.

The thing about "just looking at photos" is, the more demand there is for this sort of picture, the more people will produce that sort of picture to meet the demand. So, I'm good with criminalizing that, just to try to limit the market.

The comparison with LGBT rights movements is problematic, at best. The point of queer rights isn't just, "There's nothing wrong with being gay," but also, "There's nothing wrong with acting on gay attraction." The message, "We're not hurting anyone by having consensual gay sex, so you should leave us alone," obviously does not port to pedophiles. It's going to be hard enough to argue that your advocating for acceptance of pedophiles, and not the acceptance of pedophilia, without directly tying your argument to a movement that was explicitly about advocating cultural acceptance of non-standard sexual practices.
  #4  
Old 08-08-2019, 06:39 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by jebert View Post
Viewing child pornography is a criminal offense even though no child is directly involved in the act of viewing. The CREATION of child porn definitely harms children and should incur very stiff criminal penalties. But the viewing? Or the passive attraction?
Seriously? How do you think the kids who were used to create said child porn feel knowing that people are viewing their abuse and getting off on it? You believe they'd just brush it off as "harmless"? How would YOU feel, if someone was viewing you being tortured over and over and over and over, and jerking off while watching it?

  #5  
Old 08-08-2019, 09:32 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,365
The gay rights movement is about people wanting to be accepted as normal members of society while having consensual gay sex and relationships. Over a period of decades, this goal was achieved as millions of people gathered the courage to come out of the closet, even though, especially early on, many of them faced severe social consequences for doing so.

But the kind of sex pedophiles want to have is by definition non-consensual. Should we think badly of people who happen to have brains wired for pedophilia, but who realize that their desires can never be ethically acted upon and accept a life of celibacy (the clinical term for such people is "functional pedophile")? I don't think so.

Maybe, if more functional pedophiles were willing to come out of the closet, society might evolve gradually in the direction of being more accepting of these people. But I think this is quite unlikely to happen, since they still wouldn't actually get to have the kind of sex they want to have. So the motivation for them to come out and face society's disapproval isn't there.
  #6  
Old 08-08-2019, 11:19 PM
SlackerInc is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,997
I once reported a housemate (who had seemed so normal when he answered the ad and moved in) to the cops for downloading child porn on our shared network. He ended up being prosecuted and the prosecutor contacted me about testifying against him but it never happened so I think he pled out. I don’t feel guilty about “narcing” him out. If it were entirely artificially created images, that might be different, although it’s still pretty gross.
  #7  
Old 08-09-2019, 08:34 AM
Annie-Xmas is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 55,446
The argument that gay=pedophilia is old as homosexuality, and wrong as can be. A homosexual is a person who wants a physical relationship with an ADULT of the same gender. It hurts nobody.

Pedophiles hurt their victims.

According to some of the stupid anti-gay religious people I've talked to, a man having a sexual relationship with a boy is a homosexual, with a girl is a pedophile.
  #8  
Old 08-09-2019, 11:27 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,712
The acceptance of LGBQT people (to me at least) isnít primarily because ďGod made them that way.Ē Itís because being homosexual, transgender, bisexual, etc. are not harmful. Sex between consenting adults doesnít hurt anyone. Identifying as a gender different than your biological sex and asking others to recognize that doesnít hurt anyone. Acting on urges for pedophilia is harmful, and thatís why itís wrong. Whether or not someone was born that way doesnít play a part in me deciding whether or not what someone does is wrong. The main issue is whether or not they are hurting other people with their actions.
  #9  
Old 08-09-2019, 12:00 PM
jebert is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 734
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
ACTING on urges for pedophilia is harmful, and thatís why itís wrong.
(Emphasis added)
I agree 100%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
The main issue is whether or not they are hurting other people with their ACTIONS.
(Emphasis added)
What are we to do then when there have been no ACTIONS? Judge them in our certainty that the actions will surely come eventually? Yes, keep our children away from them when we are aware of their predilection. But do we continue to treat them like gays were treated 50 years ago when they have their predilection under control?
  #10  
Old 08-09-2019, 12:11 PM
enalzi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by jebert View Post
What are we to do then when there have been no ACTIONS? Judge them in our certainty that the actions will surely come eventually? Yes, keep our children away from them when we are aware of their predilection. But do we continue to treat them like gays were treated 50 years ago when they have their predilection under control?
I don't understand what you even want. Are there really people out there who are going, "Boy, I wish I could be out as a pedophile without anyone judging me. I promise I won't do anything!"
  #11  
Old 08-09-2019, 12:17 PM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is online now
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by jebert View Post


What are we to do then when there have been no ACTIONS? Judge them in our certainty that the actions will surely come eventually? Yes, keep our children away from them when we are aware of their predilection. But do we continue to treat them like gays were treated 50 years ago when they have their predilection under control?
There is no meaningful connection between pedophilia and homosexuality. None whatsoever. Drawing these types of parallels is both trite and gross.
  #12  
Old 08-09-2019, 03:31 PM
begbert2 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by jebert View Post
What are we to do then when there have been no ACTIONS? Judge them in our certainty that the actions will surely come eventually? Yes, keep our children away from them when we are aware of their predilection. But do we continue to treat them like gays were treated 50 years ago when they have their predilection under control?
Downloading child porn is an action. Specifically it's an action that encourages suppliers of child porn to step up their game, producing more and more content to feed the unending demand.
  #13  
Old 08-09-2019, 03:49 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 35,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by enalzi View Post
I don't understand what you even want. Are there really people out there who are going, "Boy, I wish I could be out as a pedophile without anyone judging me. I promise I won't do anything!"
I heard a radio/podcast story that went into the lives of pedophiles who abstained from sexual activity with children. They talked about how the revulsion against them interfered with their ability to seek mental health treatment, to form groups to support each other in abstaining from/preventing sexual activity with children, to discuss their issues online, etc.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.
  #14  
Old 08-09-2019, 05:43 PM
SlackerInc is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,997
There’s a good Kevin Bacon movie along those lines called “The Woodsman”.
  #15  
Old 08-09-2019, 05:49 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 12,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
Downloading child porn is an action. Specifically it's an action that encourages suppliers of child porn to step up their game, producing more and more content to feed the unending demand.
To spell it out in explicit detail: this means that children are harmed in the making of the child porn.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
I heard a radio/podcast story that went into the lives of pedophiles who abstained from sexual activity with children. They talked about how the revulsion against them interfered with their ability to seek mental health treatment, to form groups to support each other in abstaining from/preventing sexual activity with children, to discuss their issues online, etc.
I'm convinced there are places they can discuss things online. I also believe that mental health professionals are available to work with these individuals. I can understand the support group concern, but if AA meetings can be kept on the down-low then I think groups could be formed. It's a question of how badly an individual wants to change their behavior versus making excuses why it's too hard.
  #16  
Old 08-09-2019, 06:47 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,778
I've heard of such groups, but a lot of them tend to feed into the whole thing, from what I gather.
  #17  
Old 08-09-2019, 06:49 PM
Roderick Femm's Avatar
Roderick Femm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: On the cusp, also in SF
Posts: 7,169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
To spell it out in explicit detail: this means that children are harmed in the making of the child porn.



I'm convinced there are places they can discuss things online. I also believe that mental health professionals are available to work with these individuals. I can understand the support group concern, but if AA meetings can be kept on the down-low then I think groups could be formed. It's a question of how badly an individual wants to change their behavior versus making excuses why it's too hard.
He wasn't even talking about changing behavior, he was talking about people who have always abstained from that behavior (including viewing such porn). How would they find each other to talk about this, considering the risks? Society seems just as willing to condemn the feelings as they are the actions, perhaps because most people are convinced that no-one can or even wants to resist their fantasies and urges. Private therapy, yes, but that gets very expensive.

If that's what the OP is talking about, then I have some sympathy for those people. I also think it would be good for society to understand how many such people there (probably) are.
  #18  
Old 08-09-2019, 06:56 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 35,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
To spell it out in explicit detail: this means that children are harmed in the making of the child porn.



I'm convinced there are places they can discuss things online. I also believe that mental health professionals are available to work with these individuals. I can understand the support group concern, but if AA meetings can be kept on the down-low then I think groups could be formed. It's a question of how badly an individual wants to change their behavior versus making excuses why it's too hard.
The people being interviewed weren't making any excuses and they didn't need to "change" their behavior. They were celibate and they were trying to set up structures for others took seek help and support.

I know plenty of people who refuse to seek professional help for any kind of mental health problem because of the social stigma. The stigma in this case is much worse and any inkling of their particular mental health problem would threaten a complete destruction of their lives, regardless of whether they had ever assaulted anyone.

It's easy to say "nothing's stopping them" if you want to remain on the absolutely superficial level. Bug any Aeolus consideration would telll you that there is plenty stopping them.

There are plenty of people who would say that people like this don't deserve any help. And that's on top of the fact that many people don't have access to health care especially mental health care.

There are plenty of people who would say that all these people should just be locked up or put to death regardless of their determination not to assault.

Here's the episode.

https://www.thisamericanlife.org/522...ered/act-two-0

Quote:
There's one group of people that is universally tarred and feathered in the United States and most of the world. We never hear from them, because they can't identify themselves without putting their livelihoods and reputations at risk. That group is pedophiles. It turns out lots of them desperately want help, but because it's so hard to talk about their situation it's almost impossible for them to find it. Reporter Luke Malone spent a year and a half talking to people in this situation, and he has this story about one of them.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.
  #19  
Old 08-09-2019, 07:32 PM
Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 439
I actually had this conversation the other day.

So here are my thoughts on the matter. Pedophilia, like any fetish, isn't a choice. If you have a foot fetish, guess what? Feet are going to drive you crazy, if you're into idk bug bites, well then bug bites are going to turn you on. If we can acknowledge pedophilia is simply a fetish then we can have a good faith argument. Now, we do criminalize these peoples fetish, we tell them it's wrong to feel the way they do towards children. We all agree that the act of having sex with a child, is totally wrong. However, we don't agree that people should be punished for the way they were born. A couple decades ago there was a lot of discriminatory positions on homosexuals. We labeled homos as bad, saying it's wrong to sleep with another man. Ultimately just butt fucking your buddy isn't harming anyone. However funding child porn, or actually molesting a child, does harm people. This is why I heavily disagree with any government that tries to regulate "loli" or any kind of stimulant for pedophiles to get off to. If you're turned on by children, sorry to say but for the rest of your life you're going to be turned on by children. Understanding your fetish can and does harm others specifically children, you should obviously not act on those instincts. Of course you're going to seek pleasure, which is why you date a small asian women and ask her to dress up like a little girl, or you go find a loli hentai and jerk off to it. Society is not robust enough to handle pedophiles, so it's up to pedophiles themselves to stimulate their desires in ways that do not harm others.

As for how society treats pedos. I think we should acknowledge that we are indeed discriminating against them, but for good reason. There are a lot of parallels with homosexuality and how we treated the gays. We should stop demonizing pedophilia and telling them they're bad people for feeling the way they do, and instead acknowledge they are humans with fetishes like anyone else. This doesn't mean we let them rape kids, it just means we try to incentive them to stimulate their fantasies in a way that doesnt harm children, IE watching loli or fucking a girl who dresses up like a child.


To clarify some points.

Q) Should we try changing pedophiles behavior
A) No, just like you shouldn't try turning a gay guy straight.

Q) What should we do about pedos raping children
A) Incentivize other forms of stimulation, IE loli or role play.

Q) What do we do about someone who has child porn
A) delete it, find who made it delete all traces of it. Personally, I don't believe the government should be throwing people in jail for jerking off to children, gore, rape, murder, whatever grotesque shit you can think of. My main concern is how far this will go, the precedent it sets. Of course we don't want pedophiles funding other pedophiles who rape children, but at the same time we shouldn't want a precedent of the Government breaking down your door taking your computer and throwing you into a cage for looking at something because it turns you on. I personally, think it's more wrong for the Government to be locking people up due to their sexual nature, than it is for a ring of pedophiles to circulate footage of a child in a sexual manner. I don't like it anymore than most people, but I can't in a good conscious justify locking someone up for their sexual orientation especially when the only crime they committed was watching porn.
  #20  
Old 08-09-2019, 07:35 PM
Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
There is no meaningful connection between pedophilia and homosexuality. None whatsoever. Drawing these types of parallels is both trite and gross.
Yes there is. They are both uncontrollable fetishes or sexual desires. You can't turn a gay guy straight, and you can't turn a pedophile into a non-pedo.

The parallels between homosexuality and any other fetish or sexual desire, and pedophilia are real, they are significant, and just because you disagree with pedophilia like most people, doesn't mean those parallels don't exist or aren't meaningful.
  #21  
Old 08-09-2019, 07:43 PM
Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 439
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
Downloading child porn is an action. Specifically it's an action that encourages suppliers of child porn to step up their game, producing more and more content to feed the unending demand.
Agreed, see my post 2 posts above this one.

However, the same goes for gore, murder, self harm, etc... These are real things, real fetishes, theres a real demand, and theres a real supply. It doesn't matter what it is, where there is demand, there will be supply. You can try all you want to stop the demand, but until you stop the supply it will always exist. I don't believe it's right to lock someone up for watching porn, regardless of what it is even if its child porn or gore. Yes, you're giving the supplier a motive to supply more. That's a problem, but locking people in cages for watching porn on their computer, I just cannot agree with that. I think we should be more focused on alternative ways to stimulate their desires. Specifically Loli and roleplay.

I think we all agree, pedophilia is just a fetish like any other fetish. Pedophiles just like homosexuals can't change what turns them on. Society is simply not robust enough yet to handle pedophilia. Let me throw out some crazy ideas.

Let's say we have full VR with neurolinking, so you can 100% control your own body in VR, and you can feel physical sensation in this VR. Someone designs a pedophile VR, where pedos can in a virtual reality have sex with children. I believe, our current society would make this illegal under the false premise that it'll incentivize pedos to have sex with real life children. I'd argue that like loli, it would stimulate their sexual desires allowing them to keep them in check better.
  #22  
Old 08-09-2019, 07:57 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 12,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
I think we all agree, pedophilia is just a fetish like any other fetish. Pedophiles just like homosexuals can't change what turns them on. Society is simply not robust enough yet to handle pedophilia. Let me throw out some crazy ideas.
We don't all agree.
  #23  
Old 08-09-2019, 08:46 PM
Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
We don't all agree.
How don't you agree? It's literally a fetish, a specific sexual desire. I 100% do not understand what you're disagreeing with.
  #24  
Old 08-10-2019, 12:10 AM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 12,513
First, pedophiles are distinct from sexual predators. Depending on the age of the individual, only 30-50% of "pedophiles" actually display sexual preference for children. The other 50-70% are not sexually attracted to children but are more properly classified as child molesters (AKA sexual predators). This study concludes that due to extreme variance in socio-cultural norms on a global basis, it's very difficult to determine how many people actually have a sexual preference versus a different cultural norm.

Second, extreme fetishism and pedophilia are both considered sexual disorders in the medical community, but are not considered the same disorder.

A brief refresher on fetishism:

Quote:
Sexual fetishism or erotic fetishism is a sexual fixation on a nonliving object or nongenital body part.
Quote:
In common parlance, the word fetish is used to refer to any sexually arousing stimuli, not all of which meet the medical criteria for fetishism. This broader usage of fetish covers parts or features of the body (including obesity and body modifications), objects, situations and activities (such as smoking or BDSM). Paraphilias such as urophilia, necrophilia and coprophilia have been described as fetishes.
Third, conflating homosexuality with pedophilia is wrong. Healthy homosexual relationships involve consenting adults (just as healthy heterosexual relationships do). By definition, children cannot consent.

Fourth, pedophiles can change their sexual preference, just as other types of sexual disorders can be treated.

Quote:
Multiple lines of evidence suggest that paraphilic interests do change. These include the fact that sex crime rates are dropping, the incidence of sex crimes decreases as people age, and the likelihood that a known high-risk sex offender will ever re-offend decreases the longer the offender does not commit a crimeóas well as the self-report of men and women with paraphilic disorders.
Fifth, see bolded line above. I'm calling it out for emphasis. Engaging in pedophiliac behavior, even virtually, is the opposite of what should be done in order to successfully treat the disorder.
  #25  
Old 08-10-2019, 12:24 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
Yes there is. They are both uncontrollable fetishes or sexual desires. You can't turn a gay guy straight, and you can't turn a pedophile into a non-pedo.

The parallels between homosexuality and any other fetish or sexual desire, and pedophilia are real, they are significant, and just because you disagree with pedophilia like most people, doesn't mean those parallels don't exist or aren't meaningful.
Pedophilia has no more similarity to homosexuality than it does to heterosexuality. If you consider homosexuality an "uncontrollable fetish or sexual desire" (I don't -- sexual orientation is not a "fetish"), then heterosexuality is also an "uncontrollable fetish or sexual desire". Similarly, you can't turn a straight guy gay.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 08-10-2019 at 12:25 AM.
  #26  
Old 08-10-2019, 07:51 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
I actually had this conversation the other day.

So here are my thoughts on the matter. Pedophilia, like any fetish, isn't a choice. If you have a foot fetish, guess what? Feet are going to drive you crazy, if you're into idk bug bites, well then bug bites are going to turn you on. If we can acknowledge pedophilia is simply a fetish then we can have a good faith argument. Now, we do criminalize these peoples fetish, we tell them it's wrong to feel the way they do towards children. We all agree that the act of having sex with a child, is totally wrong. However, we don't agree that people should be punished for the way they were born. A couple decades ago there was a lot of discriminatory positions on homosexuals. We labeled homos as bad, saying it's wrong to sleep with another man. Ultimately just butt fucking your buddy isn't harming anyone. However funding child porn, or actually molesting a child, does harm people. This is why I heavily disagree with any government that tries to regulate "loli" or any kind of stimulant for pedophiles to get off to. If you're turned on by children, sorry to say but for the rest of your life you're going to be turned on by children. Understanding your fetish can and does harm others specifically children, you should obviously not act on those instincts. Of course you're going to seek pleasure, which is why you date a small asian women and ask her to dress up like a little girl, or you go find a loli hentai and jerk off to it. Society is not robust enough to handle pedophiles, so it's up to pedophiles themselves to stimulate their desires in ways that do not harm others.

As for how society treats pedos. I think we should acknowledge that we are indeed discriminating against them, but for good reason. There are a lot of parallels with homosexuality and how we treated the gays. We should stop demonizing pedophilia and telling them they're bad people for feeling the way they do, and instead acknowledge they are humans with fetishes like anyone else. This doesn't mean we let them rape kids, it just means we try to incentive them to stimulate their fantasies in a way that doesnt harm children, IE watching loli or fucking a girl who dresses up like a child.


To clarify some points.

Q) Should we try changing pedophiles behavior
A) No, just like you shouldn't try turning a gay guy straight.

Q) What should we do about pedos raping children
A) Incentivize other forms of stimulation, IE loli or role play.

Q) What do we do about someone who has child porn
A) delete it, find who made it delete all traces of it. Personally, I don't believe the government should be throwing people in jail for jerking off to children, gore, rape, murder, whatever grotesque shit you can think of. My main concern is how far this will go, the precedent it sets. Of course we don't want pedophiles funding other pedophiles who rape children, but at the same time we shouldn't want a precedent of the Government breaking down your door taking your computer and throwing you into a cage for looking at something because it turns you on. I personally, think it's more wrong for the Government to be locking people up due to their sexual nature, than it is for a ring of pedophiles to circulate footage of a child in a sexual manner. I don't like it anymore than most people, but I can't in a good conscious justify locking someone up for their sexual orientation especially when the only crime they committed was watching porn.
I disagree with the conclusions you reach even if your underlying assumptions are correct. My point of disagreement is this. It doesnít matter if whatever weíre discussing is something that people are born with. If itís harmless (being homosexual, being heterosexual, having a fetish for feet, or any number of other things) then there should be no kind punishment because there is nothing wrong with the behavior.

On the other hand, if something is harmful (pedophilia, but also other things that are not necessarily sexual like a tendency towards violence, being a serial killer, whatever) it doesnít matter whether or not someone is like that because they were born that way. Sucks to be them, but as a society we cannot allow them to act out their urges or fantasies. If they are celibate and want psychiatric help, then it should be provided. If they partake in whatever their harmful preference is, and watching child porn does count as partaking, then they should be punished. Being born that way isnít an excuse, and again, sucks to be them, but thatís just the way it is.
  #27  
Old 08-10-2019, 08:23 AM
Annie-Xmas is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 55,446
I've had some radical religious Christians tell me my asexuality is wrong because I'm denying the way God made me.

So what? Who am I hurting? The rah-rahs saw I'll be happier with a man. Fuck 'em.
  #28  
Old 08-10-2019, 08:47 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie-Xmas View Post
I've had some radical religious Christians tell me my asexuality is wrong because I'm denying the way God made me.

So what? Who am I hurting? The rah-rahs saw I'll be happier with a man. Fuck 'em.
Exactly. It doesnít matter whether you or any one else were born that way, became that way because of your environment, or some combination of the two. What matters is whether or not your or any one elseís actions hurt others. If they donít then itís nobody elseís business what we do or donít do. If we are harming someone else, then society via the legal system should intervene.
  #29  
Old 08-10-2019, 08:58 AM
kayaker's Avatar
kayaker is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Western Pennsylvania
Posts: 32,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
We should stop demonizing pedophilia and telling them they're bad people for feeling the way they do, and instead acknowledge they are humans with fetishes like anyone else.
We can begin by having all Chuck E Cheese locations hang banners out front reading Pedophiles Welcome!.
  #30  
Old 08-10-2019, 09:04 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is online now
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
Yes there is. They are both uncontrollable fetishes or sexual desires. You can't turn a gay guy straight, and you can't turn a pedophile into a non-pedo.

The parallels between homosexuality and any other fetish or sexual desire, and pedophilia are real, they are significant, and just because you disagree with pedophilia like most people, doesn't mean those parallels don't exist or aren't meaningful.
The key is "meaningful." Serial killers breathe air just like non-serial killers, so they are like the same! That's about the level of ridiculousness I'm seeing. The more obvious delineation is on the one side you have activity that harms other people, specifically children, and on the other, you have activity that harms no one.

Last edited by Bone; 08-10-2019 at 09:04 AM.
  #31  
Old 08-10-2019, 11:53 AM
Annie-Xmas is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 55,446
FBI agent John Douglas has a chapter in his book Journey Into Darkness about the "proper" activities for pedophiles, like using children's clothes and toys catalogs instead of porn, viewing children in public, talking to them when they are with an adult, and backing off if the child seems at all reluctant to interact with you.

In no way, shape, matter or form does he endorse using child porn or other, more gross out activities.
  #32  
Old 08-10-2019, 03:16 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
but at the same time we shouldn't want a precedent of the Government breaking down your door taking your computer and throwing you into a cage for looking at something because it turns you on.
So you're saying it should be legal to look at child porn? No, absolutely not. If someone's looking at child porn, yes, absolutely they should be arrested and sent to prison. It is NOT a victimless crime.

The children who were used to make said material are being abused all over again. The idea that "it's just pictures!" is a sick and fucked up one.

I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with someone's computer being confiscated and them being "thrown into a cage" for looking at child porn.

Last edited by Guinastasia; 08-10-2019 at 03:17 PM.
  #33  
Old 08-10-2019, 03:56 PM
Johanna's Avatar
Johanna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Altered States of America
Posts: 13,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
Bug any Aeolus consideration would telll
Bug what?
  #34  
Old 08-10-2019, 04:05 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 35,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna View Post
Bug what?
I think I meant to say ďbut any serious consideration ...Ē

I think someone at Autocorrect is messing with me.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.
  #35  
Old 08-10-2019, 04:42 PM
SlackerInc is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinastasia View Post
So you're saying it should be legal to look at child porn? No, absolutely not. If someone's looking at child porn, yes, absolutely they should be arrested and sent to prison. It is NOT a victimless crime.

The children who were used to make said material are being abused all over again. The idea that "it's just pictures!" is a sick and fucked up one.

I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with someone's computer being confiscated and them being "thrown into a cage" for looking at child porn.

As I said, I turned in my housemate for it for this reason. But what about super-realistically simulated images?
  #36  
Old 08-10-2019, 08:04 PM
Two Many Cats is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,823
I have a sneaking suspicion that pedophilia is genetic, just like homosexuality, and also heterosexuality.

If science finds out that this is the case, society will have to deal with it somehow.
  #37  
Old 08-10-2019, 08:05 PM
yo han go's Avatar
yo han go is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 354
That is the thin line we are talking about. I'd say it is in same bag with super realistic gore movies. Bad taste? For Sure. Anyone hurt ? Not likely (assuming author only used models from imagination).

I do not like to be seen as devil's advocate here, but I don't like the idea of enforcing thought crime from 1984 either.
  #38  
Old 08-10-2019, 08:58 PM
JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 15,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
As I said, I turned in my housemate for it for this reason. But what about super-realistically simulated images?
IMO for one, if no harm, then no foul. If it's purely virtual CG or drawn hentai with no real people used in the making, there should be no legal problem, however distasteful some other observer may find it.
  #39  
Old 08-10-2019, 09:14 PM
OldGuy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Very east of Foggybog, WI
Posts: 5,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Two Many Cats View Post
I have a sneaking suspicion that pedophilia is genetic, just like homosexuality, and also heterosexuality.

If science finds out that this is the case, society will have to deal with it somehow.
Shouldn't be any harder than if they find out being a psychopath is genetic. I don't think we ought to be locking them up before they begin acting on it is some illegal ways.
  #40  
Old 08-11-2019, 01:24 PM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
As I said, I turned in my housemate for it for this reason. But what about super-realistically simulated images?
I honestly don't know. As long as it was a certainty that they were simulated, and that they didn't use real people as models, I suppose. (Although it still turns my stomach)
  #41  
Old 08-11-2019, 01:38 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,541
Side question: Are all gay people ok with trans gendered people being included in their group? I mean was there a vote taken (no seriously)?
  #42  
Old 08-11-2019, 01:41 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Side question: Are all gay people ok with trans gendered people being included in their group?
No - trans-exclusionary radical feminists (TERFs) do not like trans people, and there are no doubt many TERFs who are lesbian.

Last edited by Velocity; 08-11-2019 at 01:41 PM.
  #43  
Old 08-11-2019, 06:09 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,528
Heck, not all lesbians or gay men are ok with bisexuals (the "B" in "LGBTQ") being included in "their group". All sorts of people can be bigoted about all sorts of other people.

Last edited by Kimstu; 08-11-2019 at 06:09 PM.
  #44  
Old 08-12-2019, 08:21 AM
Annie-Xmas is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 55,446
Right, because we know all LGBTQ's think exactly alike. They dn't and they don't all act exactly alike.
  #45  
Old 08-12-2019, 01:42 PM
SciFiSam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beffnal Green innit
Posts: 8,384
OK, before I start in on a more reasoned post, it is pretty fucking shitty to compare homosexuality to paedophilia. I'm really, really sick of having my sexuality compared to being attracted to children. Men and women have different bodily features, and so do children. There's usually love (or the potential of it) involved in sexuality (and paedophilia generally doesn't have that, because kids grow up), but there's also attraction to bodies. Adult bodies are very different to children's. And consent is a big fucking deal. So no love, different bodies, no consent. Those are pretty major differences between any adult sexuality and attraction to children.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
As I said, I turned in my housemate for it for this reason. But what about super-realistically simulated images?
Super-realistic images would provide cover for real child porn. Paedophiles who download this stuff could claim they thought it was fake and it would be hard to prove otherwise. Allowing it would essentially be allowing real child porn.

However, drawings and animation should be allowed, IMO, though even there the concern would be - did the artist create this after watching it in real life? That could be checked on a case-by-case basis where the drawings look obviously realistic or are based on a child the artist knows.

And consensual role-play with obvious adults should definitely be allowed. Hard to see how anyone's harmed there. Some of it is arguably not even about paedophilia but power, esp. since the men who partake often choose to be the "baby" or whatever. I think that generally is allowed, even if it's filmed.

There must be an awful lot of people with these desires who never act on them, and I feel sorry for them. However, I'm not going to categorise it the same as being a foot fetishist and definitely not the same as being gay or straight. You're* fantasising about someone who can't consent. Not a thing, like shoes, not a part of a person, like feet, not a particular way of having sex, but sex with someone who won't enjoy it. Fetishes that are harmful are often regulated against - this isn't the only one.

And going on the number of active paedophiles who also had fulfilling consensual adult relationships, it's not the only way they can be turned on.

Are psychologists/counsellors obliged to report anyone who tells them of these tendencies while saying they haven't done anything illegal, including downloading porn?

Slacker, are you defending the OP's position because you feel guilty about turning your room-mate in and are worried that his life has been ruined? If you are, I have some sympathy because, unless he's very rich, his life really is going to be a lot more difficult because of this - forever - and that could potentially drive him into the company of more active paedophiles. I'm not sure the rule of "you viewed child porn, you are forever banished" is helpful to anyone. People can change and learn. But I really have no idea how to legislate for that without letting active paedophiles through the cracks.

But he did something really bad that he knew was bad and harmful. And child porn that is shared can have very long-lasting damage - the child will know it's out there forever, still being shared, and you never know who among your acquaintances has seen it. It makes the abuse last forever. That's a pretty big deal. Child porn wouldn't have the same level of harm without people like him downloading it; he didn't just view the abuse, he added to it.


*Generic you, nobody on here
  #46  
Old 08-12-2019, 02:00 PM
Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 22,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by SciFiSam View Post
Slacker, are you defending the OP's position because you feel guilty about turning your room-mate in and are worried that his life has been ruined? If you are, I have some sympathy because, unless he's very rich, his life really is going to be a lot more difficult because of this - forever - and that could potentially drive him into the company of more active paedophiles. I'm not sure the rule of "you viewed child porn, you are forever banished" is helpful to anyone. People can change and learn. But I really have no idea how to legislate for that without letting active paedophiles through the cracks.

But he did something really bad that he knew was bad and harmful. And child porn that is shared can have very long-lasting damage - the child will know it's out there forever, still being shared, and you never know who among your acquaintances has seen it. It makes the abuse last forever. That's a pretty big deal. Child porn wouldn't have the same level of harm without people like him downloading it; he didn't just view the abuse, he added to it.
Also, as SlackerInc mentioned, the perpetrator in question was downloading child porn on the network SlackerInc shared while living in SlackerInc's residence. That puts SlackerInc and the rest of his household at risk for suspicion of being somehow complicit in the crime. Even if the housemate was an "abstinent" pedophile who fully intended never to act on his desires in any way with a child in real life, there is nothing to feel guilty about for having turned him in simply on account of the danger his activities posed to the people he was living with. Not to mention his culpably (and criminally) contributing to the market for criminal and harmful child porn by consuming said child porn.
  #47  
Old 08-12-2019, 02:46 PM
Broomstick's Avatar
Broomstick is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 28,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by SciFiSam View Post
*Generic you, nobody on here
We actually have had at least two admitted pedophiles on this forum in the past - I know one was banned, can't recall about the other. Haven't heard from any such recently, though.
  #48  
Old 08-12-2019, 03:04 PM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,364
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRDelirious View Post
IMO for one, if no harm, then no foul. If it's purely virtual CG or drawn hentai with no real people used in the making, there should be no legal problem, however distasteful some other observer may find it.
It’s currently illegal though, under the 2003 PROTECT act.

https://www.bayarea-attorney.com/can...g-at-animation

And I think porn where adult actors pretend to be underage is also illegal. An old boyfriend of mine and I used to watch soft core HBO porn sometimes, mostly for laughs. And we noticed whenever a female actor was dressed as a cheerleader, there was always some dialogue that referred to her as being a college student. Always. I figured it must be a law. Or at least a gray area.

Last edited by Ann Hedonia; 08-12-2019 at 03:05 PM.
  #49  
Old 08-12-2019, 09:31 PM
SciFiSam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beffnal Green innit
Posts: 8,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broomstick View Post
We actually have had at least two admitted pedophiles on this forum in the past - I know one was banned, can't recall about the other. Haven't heard from any such recently, though.
Fair enough, but I'm not accusing anyone on this thread.
  #50  
Old 08-13-2019, 12:08 AM
Guinastasia's Avatar
Guinastasia is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 52,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broomstick View Post
We actually have had at least two admitted pedophiles on this forum in the past - I know one was banned, can't recall about the other. Haven't heard from any such recently, though.
Both were. The first one was actually contacting underage members, IIRC.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017