# Is it sick and wrong? Or a clever way to pay for your kid's college education? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 24, 2001, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577 "2001-07-24T01:00:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![capacitor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e47774/32.png) [@capacitor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/capacitor)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/221 "2001-08-01T01:27:39Z")
Oh BTW I do apologize to you, wring, for calling you a zealot. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/222 "2001-08-01T01:42:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > **erislover: > If I recall correctly and you’ve professed to be 25ish, then there is no question that you are both breaking the law and taking advantage of children.** Actually, there is a question. Who says I’ve done anything ever? I’ve certainly not said that. Must be the fact that I willfully admit that I find 16 year olds as attractive now as I did when I was sixteen, and for the same reasons, that I must have done something. Right? If calling me in on this is what it will take to prove to you that I am not [li]a molester[/li][li]an exploiter[/li][li]evil[/li][li]stupid[/li][li]generally a bad guy[/li][li]someone who has sex with girls he feels could consent[/li]then by all means call me in. I’ve never had a thing against you, and I still don’t, but I find your ideas here to be misplaced. I have not, nor will I ever, do such a thing. > [@](#): > > There is a world of difference between a 15/16 year old and a 25 year old. If you had read my post you’d see I feel the same thing. > [@](#): > > And yes, I have talked to 16 year old girls. “Talking” however, is not the issue. A truer word was never spoken. > [@](#): > > The gulf in maturity and sophistication even [between 19 yr olds and 15 yr olds] was huge, and there was absolutely no question that to take advantage of these girls would be both illegal and morally reprehensible, though some certainly seemed sexy as hell to me. Then you, too, are a pedophile. Welcome to the club. Wasn’t so hard to admit that attractive girls are attractive, was it? And look, you are still not evil. > [@](#): > > I abstained out of a sense of responsibility. As do I continue to, among other things (fear of the law not being one of them). > [@](#): > > I don’t know how you do. I don’t know why you think I do. All I did was admit that I found young girls attractive and then apply all your stereotypes (among others people have used here) to myself. You did the rest. > [@](#): > > I can’t imagine that it’s satisfying or fulfilling to prey on naivete. Nor can I. > [@](#): > > More likely is that you are dominating, manipulating and managing a relationship with a mere child to suit your own needs. The kid doesn’t know what they are doing. You do. You’re hurting them. More likely the leap from “erl finds girls of a certain age attractive” to “erl fucks these girls three ways to to Teusday” is in error. I continue to resent the link that I might be a molester by virtue of merely finding young girls attractive, or that just because I find a young girl attractive, even if I thought she could consent, that I would act on it. I continue to resent the link that pedophiles are molesters. That is **not** a correctly loose definition. I will not accept it. I also continue to resent that people consider Britney Spears to be selling music. I think that definition of music is far to broad. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/223 "2001-08-01T02:04:24Z")
erislover: I don’t enjoy people being disingenuous, fucking around with me, or playing word games. You represented yourself to be a pedophile. While **technically** that simply means someone who is attracted to a child or children, you know damn well the common and accepted definition. Since most people find sexually attractive people attractive regardless of age, calling them all pedophiles is useless semantically. The common, accepted, and current usage implies one who is unusually attracted, or who acts on that attraction in an unusual and/or unacceptable fashion. A crimininal. A molester. One does not identify oneself as a pedophile simply because he thinks Britney Spears looked “hot” when she was seventeen. You **undoubtedly** are aware of these connotations. You are being deliberately disingenuous and misleading. It would have been very easy to clear this up at the outset. Combine this with your “Im going, I’m coming back, I’m going , I’m coming back” bullshit and dramaticizations and I am very hard to take anything you say seriously, or take you at your word. I resent your dishonesty, and I resent your waste of my time. I don’t like being played games with **especially** on such a serious topic. I have a bunch of other things I’d like to say, but Gaudere probably wouldn’t appreciate them, and your not worth the trip to the pit. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/224 "2001-08-01T02:26:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by capacitor \* > \*\*Oh BTW I do apologize to you, wring, for calling you a zealot. \*\* 😃 friends ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/225 "2001-08-01T02:58:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Scylla \* > \*\* > You represented yourself to be a pedophile. While **technically** that simply means someone who is attracted to a child or children, you know damn well the common and accepted definition. > > The common, accepted, and current usage implies one who is unusually attracted, or who acts on that attraction in an unusual and/or unacceptable fashion. A crimininal. A molester. > \*\* I gotta disagree with you on this, Scylla. Definition of a pedophile is “one afflicted with pedophilia” which is: Main Entry: pe·do·phil·ia Pronunciation: "pE-d&-'fi-lE-& Function: noun Etymology: New Latin Date: 1906 : sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object It does NOT mean one acts on it. I would venture a guess that there are an enormous number of pedophiles in the world who have never come close to “acting” on it, while there is a large number of child molesters in the world who are, in fact, NOT pedophiles. (the majority of fathers who rape and molest their own daughters have been shown not to be true pedophiles. It’s usually a complex dynamic that has to do with mom/wife, feeling inadequate, bla blah) As we are all often reminded around here, the SD is about fighting ignorance. To say that it is “accepted” that a pedophile is a molester is not fighting any ignorance that I can see. I think your emotionalism about this subject is making you a little less objective than you might mean to be. erislover has been remarkably frank, in my opinion. Certainly more so than I would be, were I of like mind. To confess that one even has the \* thoughts \* is to be branded a molester, as you have just demonstrated. That he is willing to go as far as he is, knowing this, amazes me. stoid ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/226 "2001-08-01T04:39:28Z")
Pedophile would generally find children under the age of puberty and in the early states of desirable. erislover, we don’t take too kindly to people who deliberately misrepresent themselves to state a point. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/227 "2001-08-01T04:48:20Z")
The definition stands. I have not misrepresented myself. Since the definition could also have been the DSM-IV definition, I have misrepresented myself. Since there are two definitions which don’t necessarily agree, this is yet another example where people shouldn’t jump to conclusions. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/228 "2001-08-01T13:21:23Z")
erislover: Surely you are aware of the connotations of term. Surely you are aware of the effect that labelling youself as such was. Contrary to Stoid’s thoughts I see no bravery in “confessing” to something that basically every other person in the world would readily admit to if couched in the proper terms. I see no “jumping to conclusions” when someone deliberately engenders a false pretense. Not only that, you aren’t very **good** at it. In an earlier post you stated that you stayed “mostly legal,” with your activities. That not only implies, but states that you engaged in statutory rape on occasion. So I guess that was just another lie. Or, is **this** the new lie? There are so many it must be hard to keep track. There’s no jumping to conclusions when you deliberately mislead and lie. It’s called being a troll. ---
**Author:** ![kabbes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e99b99/32.png) [@kabbes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kabbes)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/229 "2001-08-01T13:48:48Z")
Oh honestly, **Scylla**. I’m on the side of yourself and **wring** in this debate (which I’ve been following with interest). But I knew _exactly_ what **erl** meant when he posted it. Read it again - there’s no ambiguity there and no indication that he actually acts on any desire. In fact, his point has been made eloquantly - a _paedophile_ is not the same thing as a _child molester_. This point has been remade several times in the last few pages (by **phil** amongst others) and you’ve missed the significance of it each time. Maybe this stunt will reinforce the point a little more. **Caerie** - the act of observing affects the observed. If we say that a person becomes an adult at 18, then we end up treating those less than 18 as children. This includes not preparing them to make certain decisions. We, in effect, retard their maturity. In American society the age of 18 is accorded some significance. On this particular topic, the relevant age in the UK is 16. Is there anything about UK females that inherently means that they are able to deal with things at 16 that an American female isn’t? Yes - the simple fact that they are brought up to be ready to make those decisions at 16. Two hundred years ago girls were prepared for marriage at 13. They had to mature faster. They were _different_. You can set the age anywhere you want after puberty. But having set that age, you then have to stick to it. The act of observing affects the observed. And it can also affect the observer. pan ---
**Author:** ![kabbes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e99b99/32.png) [@kabbes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kabbes)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/230 "2001-08-01T13:52:48Z")
To elaborate, **Scylla** , this was posted at the end of **erl** ’s speech: > [@](#): > > For the record, if anyone really wants to know, I pretty much comply with ago of consent laws in most states, and that is by physical attraction only (I say pretty much because they vary from area to area, but 15/16+). You ever talk to a 16 year old when you weren’t one? Sheesh. In other words, in terms of _physical attraction only_ he pretty much complies with the laws - pretty much because in some states the age of consent varies. pan ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/231 "2001-08-01T13:55:23Z")
:rolleyes: **Deliberately** mislead and lie? If you opened up a dictionary you’d see I didn’t mislead anyone. And I surely didn’t lie. And you are surely jumping to even more conclusions here. How much more clear do I need to make it? Trolling indeed. Is that why this entire thread I’ve been trying to caution people to not make assumptions, to not spread definitions to thin in an incorrect manner (pedophilia to molestation? please, that’s making a new definition not broadening an existing one), to try and judge the actions not the people. Is that trolling, kind sir?–Or only if we spread the definition a little thin? ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/232 "2001-08-01T13:56:55Z")
kabbes: Yes maybe you’re right. Perhaps now I’ll go start a thread about how I’m anti-gay. I’ll play with evasions and double entendres, and maybe somewhere around page 5 I’ll reveal that I really meant that I didn’t think people should be overly happy. The only lesson I learned here was not to waste my time with this guy. ---
**Author:** ![kabbes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e99b99/32.png) [@kabbes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kabbes)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/233 "2001-08-01T14:02:21Z")
I’m curious **Scylla** - what part of **erl’s** footnote did you not think was clear? How was it misleading? That wasn’t playing games, it stated exactly what it meant. pan ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/234 "2001-08-01T14:16:29Z")
kabbes: > [@](#): > > In other words, in terms of physical attraction only he pretty much complies with the laws - pretty much because in some states the age of consent varies. Now, I’m certain there’s no laws that say you can’t be physically attracted to whoever you like. So that interpretation doesn’t make any sense. The laws he’s referring to are age of consent laws, not age of attraction. Once again this post is misleading, and confused at best. The clearest meaning is that he “pretty much” complies with age of consent laws, which implies that sometimes he doesn’t. Combine this with his teasing in an earlier post about what activities he might or might not have engaged in, and I think the only fair and realistic asessment is that he’s playing, as you put it, a “stunt.” He’s deliberately creating a misconception so that he can later come out and say “Oh no! That’s not what I meant at all. Why do you people jump to conclusions?” I personally find it as transparent and immature a technique as the old “I’m leaving, no wait I’m back,” stunt. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/235 "2001-08-01T14:19:18Z")
**Stoid** : **Scylla** was pretty clear in that he had found the 15 year old girls, his riding pupils, attractive - as part of his overall attraction to physically mature women of a variety of ages. That’s not pedophilia, but **erislover** made that charge. That’s disingenious, not frank. And erislover has also strongly suggested that he’s had sex with girls below the age of consent, as opposed to merely having thoughts about it. He was ambiguous as hell about it, which I don’t consider frank either. Now I think it’s time for me to bow out of this thread. Cheerio, all. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/236 "2001-08-01T14:41:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RTFirefly \* > That’s not pedophilia, but **erislover** made that charge. That’s disingenious, not frank. Perhaps you didn’t read the definition she posted, either. > [@](#): > > He was ambiguous as hell about it, which I don’t consider frank either. I was deliberately being ambiguous to illustrate the following point: **pedophiles are not molesters**. I think I’ve illustrated it rather clearly. I think I’ve also illustrated that in ambiguous circumstances it is easy to jump to incorrect conlcusions. My appearance on this page of the thread serves as a microcosm of the whole damn thing. A simple reading of it as such might illustrate that to the observant eye. **Scylla** , I have bowed out of the debate. I am not debating people’s opinions about the situation anymore. There are others here who were doing fine without me and will hopefully continue to do so. I am now only addressing things as they affect me personally. Hopefully, then, my opponents can start forming an argument which does not involve unfound assumptions on people. **wring** continues to do an excellent job as such. There are many more points I would like to make, and if anyone would care to hear them I’d be happy to do a little one-on-one debating via e-mail for a bit, or perhaps in another thread of a similar topic where we can start fresh. It is not my prerogotive to dictate how people should present an argument, and since I wouldn’t accept the arguments people were offereing there was little point in me staying in to rebutt them. [sidenote to all]In my Navy days I remember someone mentioning that in Iceland the age of consent is 14. Wow! I don’t think I could agree to that. In Japan it is 13 last I checked. [Check this out.](http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm)[/sidenote] **kabbes** , some good points. We could have used that kind of input in the thread **dijon** had linked above where zealotry was in full force. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/237 "2001-08-01T15:09:05Z")
Well at least he admits he was being deliberately misleading. All to prove this wonderful point: > [@](#): > > I was deliberately being ambiguous to illustrate the following point: pedophiles are not molesters. This is called playing semantics. It’s being deliberately misleading and a troll. Worse still **IT’S NOT EVEN CORRECT!!** Do you mean to suggest that a person who molests only children is a molester only and not a pedophile as well? While semantically a pedophile is not necessarily a molester, would you concede that there is certainly that connotation and some overlap in common usage? Similarly, a homicidal maniac isn’t necessarily a murderer by rigid semantics, but we all know what is meant when the term is used. What a normal, courteous, and **honest** debater does if he wants to make the picayune point of semantics that you went overboard to illustrate is simply say: > [@](#): > > Hey guys, technically a pedophile isn’t necessarily a molester. I know we all use the word that way but it’s not truly correct. Pedophile simply means a sexual affinity for a child or children. If you found Britney Spears attractive at age 16, you are, again, technically, a pedophile. Maybe we should be more careful in our word usage, since what we are really talking about are pedophilic predators. It’s an anal retentive point, but one that could have been made simply and without fanfare, rather than revealing yorself to be dishonest, misleading and histrionic. That’s the way an honest and mature debater would have made his point. Finally, having made that point, it is essentially meaningless. In manners nontechnical semantics must bow to common usage. Pedophile is commonly used as a term to describe child molesters. Not only have you played mind games, been dishonest and misleading, but your “point” is also wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/238 "2001-08-01T15:13:59Z")
Similarly, I can start a thread discussing the fact that I have a “heart condition.” After garnering sympathy and condolences I can then smugly reveal that the condition of my heart is “very good.” People shouldn’t jump to conclusion. Not all heart conditions are bad. Wheee. By deliberately misleading people while being technically, semantically correct the only point that I would have made is “I am a complete asshole.” You dug your hole. ---
**Author:** ![kabbes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e99b99/32.png) [@kabbes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kabbes)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/239 "2001-08-01T15:34:17Z")
Except, **Scylla** , that in this case there was a point relevant to the underlying debate. Not a point I agree with actually, but understandble nonetheless. The point is this: _a peodophile doesn’t necessarly harm children. This means that the website under discussion is of no harm in and of itself, even if it **is** being used by peodophiles for sexual gratification_. If X is someone who is sexually attracted to children and gets pleasure out of looking at pictures of Y that are not in themselves causing any harm to Y, then there is no reason to assume any consequential harm to Y. The peodophile is no more likely to harm any future children than a consumer of pornography is likely to rape women. Now as I say, I disagree with this argument. In fact I disagree with virtually every line of it. But it is a point that **erl’s** side has been trying to make, so it is unfair to castigate him for playing with semantics when he takes a particular tack to try to prove it. pan ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2001, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577/240 "2001-08-01T15:37:45Z")
Had you read the thread or done some simple research on your own you’d find that molesters aren’t, as a rule, pedophiles either as considered by professional sources. Shall I do the search for you? I wasn’t being deliberately misleading, man, I was being deliberately _ambiguous_, and doing that to prove one of the points I was attempting to make for several pages of this debate. Characteristicly (for this thread), _you were misled_ by ambiguity instead of being intellectually honest and trying to clear up the point. If you take an ambiguous position as a factual assertion then the problem isn’t with me, my fellow doper. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-sick-and-wrong-or-a-clever-way-to-pay-for-your-kids-college-education/73577.md?page=13)