Is pedophilia "natrual" or is it a sickness?

[the_PC_apeman]

@Dijon Warlock

@ThePCapeman

I suspect we can agree that there is an age where the number of pre-pubescents capable of giving meaningful consent to sex is vanishingly small. And, that there is an age where the number of no-longer-children capable of such consent is sufficiently large. I also suspect we would agree that children develop from one age group to the other at differing rates.

“Yes” to the two latter statements, but “maybe not” to the first one (my question here would be "consent meaningful to who?") I definitely think that the well-being of the child should be the priority, and our personal prejudices should not interfere with that. So while we should definitely make the child’s well-being our first priority, that doesn’t mean we should simply tell them “NO” because it suits us (which is what we seem to be doing).

You are not sure that there is an age where the number of children capable of giving meaningful consent* to sex (or anything) is vanishingly small? I’m not looking for agreement on what that age is, just that it exists. But for sake of argument… is the number of 10-year olds capable of this consent significant? How about the number of 5-year olds? 1-year olds? 6-month olds? 1-day olds?

*Propose any definition you think appropriate

[Dijon_Warlock]

I am not convinced that age is an appropriate metric for determining “meaningful” consent on a general basis. If you wish to discuss the age below which consent becomes meaningless, we can do that, but I would set the limit much lower than society or the law would. After all, there are many jurisdictions where the “age of consent” is set way beyond puberty, and sometimes set in conjunction with adulthood. This (to me) doesn’t seem remotely factually accurate.

Peoples’ wishes with regards to having sex should definitely be respected, but that is precisely why blind adherance to the law is unjustified, IMO. The law says that “below age X, sex is BAD,” but that doesn’t seem to be remotely true (which is why it’s hard for me to agree with it…don’t get me wrong, I still obey the law, but I don’t agree with it sometimes).

[the_PC_apeman]

@Dijon Warlock

I am not convinced that age is an appropriate metric for determining “meaningful” consent on a general basis. If you wish to discuss the age below which consent becomes meaningless, we can do that, but I would set the limit much lower than society or the law would. After all, there are many jurisdictions where the “age of consent” is set way beyond puberty, and sometimes set in conjunction with adulthood. This (to me) doesn’t seem remotely factually accurate.

Peoples’ wishes with regards to having sex should definitely be respected, but that is precisely why blind adherance to the law is unjustified, IMO. The law says that “below age X, sex is BAD,” but that doesn’t seem to be remotely true (which is why it’s hard for me to agree with it…don’t get me wrong, I still obey the law, but I don’t agree with it sometimes).

I am disturbed by some of the things posted in this thread, but mostly by things that have been omitted or only half said. All I see are repeated vague statements of a seemingly ill-defined position and a nearly complete refusal to provide definitions or identify causes or solutions with any useful specificity. I see no point in continuing here. I’m done.

[Dijon_Warlock]

Wow. I’ll admit, I didn’t expect that.

I would be happy to elaborate on anything I’ve said here if you wish, but if you’re simply finished, then I’m not sure where to go from here.

I’ll respect your decision, of course, but I have to admit that I don’t understand it. I was enjoying this discussion. We may not agree on some points, but at least we seemed to be communicating (which is a good thing, I think).

This last response leaves me admittedly baffled.