Sometimes I think people are merely pointing out the flaws in your comparison, not the actual subject.
I actually think that pedophilia is similar to an obsessive disorder. These people actually can’t think about anything other than their “sexuality.” At least, not without psychological help. So it makes sense that it would come up in conversation a lot.
People have often said that obsessive compulsive disorder and really strong lust are hard to distinguish. I mean, how many times have you had to fight the urge to act like a stalker with someone you were “in love” with? It seems to be a recurring theme in popular culture, at least.
I don’t know whether Cesario is really that pathological, or just a sock/troll.
And to answer Diogenes question: of course not. I’ve actually had the experience of having to tell a kid at that age what kind of touching was and wasn’t appropriate. Skeeved me out more than you’d ever imagine.
I’ll continue to need information so long as you remain so comically puffed up with outrage.
Is the eye working alone, or is it teaming up with its twin to menace Cesario? Two against one ain’t fair, after all.
mswas…I do agree with you actually. I think that there’s not any one cause of pedophillia. I think it’s the “right combonation” that causes pedophillia.
Like, Aspie like behavoirs (being totally clueless about social protioal) almost sociopathic thinking that it’s OK/ not knowing that it’s wrong, and an OCD style obession. Remeember that dude who they thought might be connected to the Jon Benet Ramsey case?
Remember how he was OBESSED with the case? I also got a very “creepy” vibe from him. It does seem like a lot of “oreinated pedos” exude this really creepy vibe, that’s almost like how you can tell that some obiviously crazy people are indeed crazy.
As for a cure…I dunno…And you know…I just thought of something! Pedos have used the justification of " oh I can’t change it" as “proof” its a legit orietnation…BUT hell we can’t even cure a lot of behavoiral issues.
I’m glad you pointed that out. There are a lot of people who need to have it repeated for them. You wouldn’t think so, but the last guy who decided to post a thread complaining about me was really bad at keeping the details straight, so good for you.
So you don’t think it’s bad that people keep assuming it’s a statutory rape instead of the actual rape it really was? No one would be defending it if they didn’t assume it was a statutory rape.
Not familiar with that drug. Can you describe it’s effects for me?
Swing and a miss.
You did read in the article about his interest in a 12 year old, right? Even from just the information provided by the OP, you’d know that’s outside my AoA.
Therefore we should recognize that age of consent violations don’t fit the standard definition of rape, and calling them rape does a disservice to people, like the 13 year old mentioned in the thread, who were actually raped.
I haven’t gone into my fantasies in any of the threads on this board. I already assumed no one wanted to hear about them.
No.
I imagine that’s all it would take, yes. Still, I’m disinclined to go to the trouble of meeting you for a fight. You’re just not that important to me or my goals.
Again, no.
Yeah, because that’s a strategy that’s just brilliantly conceived, thus the existence of this thread. :rolleyes:
Why in the world would that need to be justified in the first place?
Where in the world did you get the idea that I wanted to rape anyone or have sex with anyone who wasn’t capable of meaningful consent?
Good thing we have you to point this stuff out to us. Completely wrong, but you’re still doing a valuable service.
That’s unpleasant, but hardly the worst of it. Need I point out the number of people out for my blood just for the crime of existing?
Regardless of your daughter’s feelings on the matter?
I respectfully disagree.
No, no real fear of prison. I remain arrogant enough to believe I could avoid criminal consequences myself. My concern is, and always has been, the safety of my hypothetical lover from the psychological torture she’d be put through by society in an effort to remake her into the rape victim everyone assumes she must be.
You might not believe it, but people have used that line in all seriousness while I’ve been debating with them. Absolutely hilarious.
I have no interest in your pity, and certainly not if you require me to be a self-hating wretch in order to obtain it. So sorry to have to inform you of how little value your opinion of me is.
Glad to see we’re in agreement here.
Can you provide me with an example of the age of consent ever protecting anyone? Any example where the only crime was an age of consent violation that we’ll all agree was a horrible thing that should never have been allowed to happen.
Your thoughts on this?
If she doesn’t understand, why is it okay for the 13 year old to pressure her into sex?
I trust you have a response to this, then:
There’s a reason I opose laws against assisted suacide.
I hardly think bringing up the age of consent in the Polanski case when people were having trouble grasping why people assumed the rape was statutory instead of actual is an irrelavent hyjack. But I guess you’re entitled to your opinion.
If my mind were really one-track, would not all of the threads I appeared in be about the same thing?
Considering there are no behaviors to normalize, I’d say the psychiatric litterature is making the same mistake a lot of lay people do (assuming, of course, you’re correct about this being a concensus), mistaking the word “pedophile” to be a synonym for “child molester”. Personally, I trust the psychiatric litterature (in the majority) to be more careful about this sort of distinction than you are making them out to be.
When was I coming out as gay? That isn’t right at all.
Just because it doesn’t make enough difference to make the behavior qualify as legal, does not mean that it makes no difference at all.
Works just fine if you replace the word “adults” with the word “people”, though.
Nah, I’ve been out for some time online. I hardly ever visit girlchat (which I only bothered to visit after I’d come out elsewhere, and is the only pedophile activist website I’ve ever been involved in). Been through several “non” boards before this one, and really just don’t have any problem speaking openly anymore, regardless of the hostility and/or veiled threats.
I agree with Jesus completely on this one. Which is why I’m doing what I can to stop the harm that is routinely inflicted on children because they were sexually active.
You haven’t read anything I’ve written on the moral issues involved, have you? While I have no moral issues regarding my own thoughts (and I’ll be damned if I apologieze for those) I’ve actually been quite clear on the fact that there are plenty of moral issues involved. If you have any particular scenario you want to run by me, go right ahead. Maybe it’ll clear up this misunderstanding you have that I lack any moral limits whatsoever.
What are you talking about. His point was clearly that self-loathing was a pre-requisite for his sympathies, and I informed him of precisely what I thought of the value of that sympathy. What point do you think I ignored?
No, I’m not him. I’m someone else, as I suspect the poster knew full well.
What mechanism are you seeing for this “harm” you’re worried about? I’m more than willing to help, but you’re going to need to help me understand your underlying assumptions here.
Would you like me to try to explain it, or would you prefer to remain in the dark on this for fear of being squicked out?
Mohamed historical enough for you? Six year old wife, marriage consumated at age nine, and he was considered to have had remarkable restraint for waiting that long.
So again we’re down to the current culture as the root problem, yes?
Where in the world did you get the idea that I thought she was sexually interested in me? We chatted. Are you incapable of chatting with someone attractive you don’t expect to fuck you later?
Where in the world did you get the idea that I assume people are capable of full consent from birth? Are you incapable of recognizing that I can find someone attractive without automatically assuming they are willing and able to reciprocate those attractions?
If it’s possible to add to the wrongness, it’s impossible for the lack of those things to not mitigate by their absence.
Got any suggestions on where? Seems to me there’s no place or venue that isn’t owned by someone, so if you don’t think that it’s inappropriate to ban speech soely because someone owns the locale, what zones of free speech actually exist according to you?
No, but then I wasn’t hitting on her either. Just keeping her from wandering off and falling down a nearby stairwell by having a nice chat with her while her mother was busy a few feet away.
I’m fairly consistent in my view that people have an inherent right to declare their ignorance and bigotry in the public forum of their choosing.
You have completely misunderstood my postings. Glad we cleared that up.
Um, I edited it out of that post for two reasons. One, I had already stated it elsewhere on the forum. And two, a moderator asked me not to mention it in the thread in question. I was asked directly, and I naturally answered before I remembered that the moderator had asked me not to.
Hope that clears this little misunderstanding up.
Shodan, once again, I have never brought up consequences to myself in any of my explainations for why I don’t fuck kids. I’ve spoken exclusively about the consequences to those kids. Me getting caught doesn’t enter into it because I am arrogant enough to believe I could avoid being caught if I chose to violate the law.
That was kind of my point.
Of course, my specific proposals are closer to “always case by case” rather than “always okay”.
Would you care to support the current magic-age-line-based-on-nothing, or do you feel that only unpopular views require anything resembling support? You want to talk about honest debate? Maybe you should consider what that means.
Hey, now. I don’t bring up my preferred lubricants. Why do you feel the need to bring up yours?
The thread (at least at the time I was posting) was about how people react to other people’s reactions to them coming out. My story seemed relevent, since regardless of the specific content, I liked that it wasn’t a big deal to her, and that she didn’t make a big deal of it. Some had mentioned the possibility that they would be offended by someone treating it as irrelevent, so I decided to voice my opinion on behalf of the other side.
Hers was.
No, just someone who knew me well enough not to assume I was going to go out and torture small children for my own amusement.
I did ask the thread creator whether I should select straight or other.
Oh please, I make one comment in response to something that was already posted, then everyone decides it’s oh so important to make sure no one assumes they support my existence, so they attack me, and I’m the one derailing the thread. :rolleyes:
You’ll note that in neither the suffrage, nor the circumcision, nor the abortion thread was my sexual orientation something I brought up, nor was it even recognized until someone from the other threads decided to dredge it up.
So it’s okay to opress and enslave people so long as it’s the oposite of what pedophiles want? I should really think about finding a way to turn this knee-jerk reaction to the advantage of the youth-rights cause. After all, if everything I believe in must be evil because a pedophile believes in it, maybe if I propose the exact oposite people will be so horrified that they agree with a pedophile that they’ll change their minds and start adopting more rational policies. :rolleyes:
Self-fulfilling prophecy much?
You are aware that teliophiles also have an age of attraction, and that adults do continue to age, right? Do you stop loving someone when they turn sixty and start to get sagging breasts and wrinkles? If not, why do you assume it’s different for me?
Love the baseless assumptions you’re making about my personal life.
Yeah-huh? You happen to know any adult females who are physically prepubescent? You assume that it isn’t a physical attraction to the body type, but the fact of the matter is, that’s precisely what it is. I just figured if I started waxing poetic on the subject people would get even more squicked out than they currently are, and that seemed rude.
You are aware that I am an anti-circumcision proponent, right?
And what do you think the penalty for uttering those words ought to be?
What makes you think that the child molester who attacked you was a pedophile? Most child molesters aren’t, you know.
Yes it was.
NAMBLA is what it is, and it’s a product of its history. The fact of the matter is that age of consent laws are used to discriminate against homosexuals, and NAMBLA was set up in response to just such a discrimination attempt.
No immediate plans. Why? Suspect that you would feel compelled to rape your own daughters once they turned 18, do you?
You seem to be reading it in, but otherwise, it doesn’t come in. Hence me not bringing it in.
There are alternatives to magic age lines based on nothing…
That joke ignores so much about human anatomy that I’m not sure where to start.
How do breasts and pubic hair aid in understanding anything?
Yes, and I recognize that this belief isn’t really based on anything, and I’m certainly not demanding that it be treated as fact soely because I believe it. You, however, seem to believe that the oposite should be treated as fact soely because you believe it.
Yep, got to love how that might gets lost in the suffle so that people just assume that there aren’t any actual requirements involved in that.
Where did I ever suggest anything of the sort?
Once again, my moral barriers are best summed up by this:
I have a life outside this message board, you know.
I agree with you completely. Hence the RMSC proposal I put forward.
This doesn’t follow from the former. There is no meaningful consent with those who lack that emotional development (assuming you actually have a meaningful definition for this term), but there is nothing that intrinsically prevents said emotional development from being present in a prepubescent.
It seems a bit schizophrenic, to be honest, like you haven’t really thought it completely through.
Doesn’t seem likely to me, but it’s not as though this is a falsable assertion anyway, so there’s nothing that will ever prove or disprove it.
Where did you get that I wrote the RMSC requirements? They were actually written by a debate oponent of mine some time back. She argued that children were incapable of consent, and I asked her the question “why?” The answers she gave described a list of things that children lacked which she felt were important to the concept of meaningful, informed sexual consent. After that, and at her urging, I bundled those answers into a prototype of this proposal (which was later put through several stages of refinement on open forums).
Got any specific litterature in mind?
You hear the argument, and if it isn’t compelling, then you reject it. It’s really as simple as that.
It’s not that complicated. You come to the best conclusion you can at any given time based on the information you have avalible, but you remain open to information that might change that conclusion.
Any particular argument you feel I haven’t adequitely addressed? Or are you just looking to score points?
Hm, by that logic, I didn’t reason my way to not fucking kids. I decided not to fuck kids, and then constructed an elaborate justification for why it wasn’t moral, which I was forced to restructure every time my justifications proved insufficient. Yes, that seems about right. Doesn’t mean my mind couldn’t be changed on the subject.
I just love how you get from “I had a pleasant conversation” to “I’m going to rape her”. Do you have to train for this sort of mental acrobatics, or is it something that comes natural to you?
And if we disagree that there is any more need to prevent a toddler from driving a car than we would anyone else who couldn’t pass the drivers test?
Fact is, as much as you want it to be true, there is no inherent need for an age line. Anywhere. Yes, you need some sort of line in certain circumstances, but there is no reason it has to be based on your zodiac sign. Take the driving example. We agree that there needs to be a line, but we have a test that can serve that function, so there’s no reason age has to enter into it.
Would that be your motivation, perhaps? The same thing that draws people to watch the legal child porn that is Law and Order: SVU and Dateline: To Catch a Predator?
Eh, I see it as making up for lost time spent in the proverbial closet, biting my tongue.
As to your obsession “theory,” I do have other interests. Would you like to discuss the Elder Scrolls series of computer games? The Death Gate novels? Revive the circumcision debate? Argue about the relative chances of Church coming back as more than an Epsilon echo in Red vs Blue? How about a lively debate on the ethics of the choice Bruce Willis’ character makes at the end of Surrogates?
You want to limit me to places populated by children in my age of attraction? :dubious:
Rule 34.
Shouldn’t that have made the people I am around on a regular basis nervious? Incliding the aforementioned mother and brother of that attractive four year old I spent nearly an hour conversing with the other day?
I can imagine how that went down…mainly because of your attitude problem, whether or not you admitted to them that you like to fuck little girls.
Well I can’t speak for you, but I know that whenever I’m chatting up a woman who I find sexually attractive, I’m first and foremost thinking of ways to get her into the sack. The difference is, unlike you, that I can have a meaningful relationship with her, if both of us so choose. Nor do I have to worry about her father kicking my ass if he discovers that I’m thinking about fucking her, even if I choose NOT to fuck her.
Not everyone is always thinking with their gonads.
Dang, while I don’t think I’ll ever agree with his feelings on under-teens being able to give meaningful consent, I must admit I’m leaning to taking Cesario’s side (in this pitting). Some of the rest of you are just coming off as asses or bullies.
I was making a joke about a scene in The Naked Gun 2 1/2 where Frank Drebin tries to comfort Nordberg’s wife by describing bizarre ways he’d wish to die. One was that he’d have his nuts bitten of by a Laplander, and another was the combine. Sorry to hear about your acquaintance.
Nobility has nothing to do with it. He’s a human being with the right to express himself and I am a human being with the right to be interested. Using the word ‘noble’ is just a crass attempt at trying to make it sound shameful, another effort at social control.
Who is presenting anything as anything? I am interested and I think he has the right to speak. Actually, what you call ‘reflexive contrarian’ you might notice that I defend the views of the unpopular side in a lot of cases, not just this one. If you need to diminish my views that way, by all means, but there is a sound reason why I defend these things and I can articulate it to a receptive audience.
There was only one that got shut and reopened several times. If it hadn’t been for the knee-jerking of the mods, it would’ve been confined to a single thread. And yes the intentions are the same. I never used the word ‘noble’ that’s just your puerile attempt to try and twist this, trying to make it sound like there is something wrong with the fact that I am interested in topics that you don’t want me to talk about.
You already know what makes a pedophile tick? Riiight. I am not a very strong believer in the, “I already know everything I need to know.”, excuse for speaking from irrational revulsion and trying to justify it rationally.
You mean just like you can project your biases onto NAMBLA until you come up with an answer that satisfies you.
