While I see what you’re going for, I don’t think this is a fair comparison at all and this is the sort of reasoning behind so much of the antipathy towards homosexuality. Even if one views homosexuality and pedophilia as equally immoral acts, there still remains the fundamental difference that homosexual acts can occur between two (or more) consenting adults. By definition, it is impossible for pedophilia to occur between two consenting adults.
There are plenty of other desires that people may have that, if we’re to live in a society that values the rights of individuals, also should be prohibited no matter how much it leaves the person with those urges unsatisfied. Some people have an overwhelming desire for theft or violence, but no one really tries to imagine how society’s expectations for property rights or safety affects them.
What if the 13-year old instigated it? You’ll say “well it’s the adult’s responsibility to get them to back down” and I agree. But let’s say that an adult didn’t have the self-control and went through with it.
But you think that’s the same as picking up some girl by force, taking her out in the woods, fucking her in the ass, and leaving her by the side of the road? Really?
They are both wrong, but there are gradations of wrongness here that are important to recognize.
I don’t know, seems like an odd thing to troll about. Especially when he makes rather bold statements like this one:
My wild-ass guess is that Cesario has recently “come out” via a pedophile activist message board (God only knows which one), and he’s currently basking in the attention of people who have not been exposed to that particular point of view. One wonders if he’s even aware of how many law enforcement professionals post here in their spare time, or if the moderators are (perhaps) allowing him to continue spouting his irrational drivel until they can figure out which sock account he belongs to.
Wait, why? If someone has sex with someone else against their consent, I think that’s very different from someone who has sex with someone who is not legally able to give consent. At least in the latter case she’s a willing participant, even if she doesn’t fully understand the consequences of her supposed consent.
The point that I was tryign to emphasize, and why I do think the distinction is meaningful here, is that if he had drugged a 22 year old and had sex with her against her consent, he would be charged with rape. Since she’s 13, he was charged with statutory rape. The only difference is the age, it’s still an act of rape and should be charged as such. The fact that she’s also underage should make the charge worse, not less.
Actually, I think I have to disagree with this (sorry, GK). To a certain extent, Cesario is doing what he should be doing to legitimize his point of view. He doesn’t have a chance in hell of succeeding, in my opinion, but his effort is, at least, open.
He believes age of consent laws are wrong.
He works to change them, hoping others will join his cause.
He gets shut down because not enough others do so.
He has an absolute right to petition to overturn what is, in his opinion, an unjust law. He just has to accept the consequences of his actions should he act on his beliefs prior to the law being changed.
If he ever is about to take action on his desires, I hope he recalls what Jesus said about millstones & what course Dennis Miller suggested. (I actually heard a usually-quite-gentle Seventh Day Adventist radio minister quote both Jesus & Dennis Miller regarding this.)
That doesn’t mean he has to do so here, though. I think a decision needs to be made by the higher ups about that.
I wouldn’t say that about very many posters, but we don’t need to tolerate abusive posts and have banned people for such. Well, he advocates legalizing abuse, which is just about the same thing IMHO.
He can say it all he wants - free speech and all that. But part of free speech is running this board in such a way that he has to speak somewhere else.
There’s an ongoing thread about this. I think a lot of people agree with you, and Cesario says he has never abused a child. (That’s assuming we can accept anything about him at face value, positive or negative.)
That said, just about all of his posts are attempts to justify and rationalize his impulses and a lot of posters are disgusted by that.
Strictly speaking, I don’t think he’s in contravention of any rule, although I suppose advocating child molestation would fall under the category of “being a jerk”.
Or a newborn (zero to ten being the stated age range of attraction). When those babies gurgle, they’re just asking for it.
On a level of creepiness though, fetus attraction would be even worse. Can you bust someone for amassing a video library full of fetal ultrasounds, and exchanging them with other fetophiles?*
*Could “macroscopic” become the new age of consent?
I don’t think anyone’s arguing that he doesn’t have a legal right to advocate whatever opinion he wants. What makes him exceptionally distasteful (and what sets off alarms) is that he doesn’t recognize the act of having sex with children (even with toddlers) as in any way wrong or harmful to the victim. Anyone who is able to see a 4 year old as a sexual object, and does so completely ego-syntonically (i.e. without any moral discomfort about it) is disconnected and self-justifying enough to basically be skating around in a sociopathic/predatory state of delusion, whether he’s acted on it or not, and is definitely someone to be wary about.
This is not really the case. Certainly didn’t used to be unusual to get it on with a thirteen year old; we just have a rather different idea now of informed consent… it’s really rather arbitrary. Also kids are more infantilized now which I suppose makes a difference. Heck, in my country if I were to sleep with a seventeen year old, who would be less than half my age, the majority of my male friends would be patting me on the back and be jealous. I understand that in your country this would make me some kind of predatory paedophile.
But ten year olds? Five year olds? Honestly, what the fuck? How can that not do harm?
Blaster Master, Marley23 I’d refer to LunaticFringette’s post. I personally do not think that lack of control over one’s cognitive circumstances are excuses.
I am not comparing homosexuality and pedophilia morally. I am comparing sexual attraction cognitively not morally. A pedophile might not have anymore control over their sexual attraction than a homosexual for their attraction to their own sex.
Then there is what LunaticFringette points out. I am not comparing homosexuality to insanity. I think homosexuality falls comfortably within the realm of what we consider sane. Pedophilia might not. To a certain degree, being angry at pedophiles for not having control over their behavior or for justifying their behavior is the same as being angry at schizophrenics for trying to justify their behavior. I am willing to accept that pedophilia is a form of insanity, and as such it makes them dangerous.
I am of the opinion that insanity pleas in violent crimes are a bit hokey though. Prisons are filled with mentally deranged people who did not qualify for an insanity plea, but the reality is a lot of them are just not able to function normally due to cognitive problems. Something there is missing.
My opinion on it is that mad dogs get put down. Regardless of sympathy for the mad dog. I cried when they shot Old Yeller, but he was rabid, it was the right thing to do.
13 is kind of arbitrary, although I am fully on board with setting the minimum age for sexual consent well above that. But what is not arbitrary is the fairly clear line between prepubescent and postpubescent. A 13-year-old might well fall on either side of that line. I can understand someone being attracted to a postpubescent 13-year-old (but not acting on that urge). I do NOT understand someone being attracted to a prepubescent child. I don’t think there’s much if any historical precedent for that. And as others in this thread have pointed out, it’s really creepy that cesario keeps trying to convince people that sexual activity with small children is not harmful to the children at all. Really creepy. Also gross, and wrong.
Originally Posted by Cesario
Considering I spent nearly an hour the other day chatting with a very attractive four-year-old in the presence of her mother and older brother, and the only reaction was for the girl to try to get her brother to leave so she could have me to herself, yes, I do think you’ve been horribly over-reacting.
That is the creepiest sentence I’ll read all week.