Why are people "not allowed" to have opinions on taboo topics (sexual assault,pedophilia etc.)?

I don’t know if anyone else experiences this but I frequently have. I’m allowed to have a discussion on politics and how education funds should be spent and most people may or may not agree with me but will respect my opinion. However when it comes to what pedophiles do and what should happen to them I’m personally attacked and their is absolutely no room for discussion.

An example would be me on another forum. There was this story of I’m sure you’ll remember the pedophile in Florida who was beaten by the father of the boy he was molesting. I said that he shouldn’t have done that but expressed his anger verbally towards the man, called the police and they would have dealt with it.

I also said that the man should receive serious rehabilitation (if any exists) if he is to be released back into society or be executed swiftly instead of wasting taxpayers money. The comments I got were the worst I’ve ever received on a forum or in my life. I was berated and threatened (told ‘If I ever find you, you will regret saying those words’.)

People were saying he should be beaten up and raped in prison. I asked them what good did that do. And they didn’t answer. They just continued rambling on.

This was a very well known forum and one with intelligent discussion. I couldn’t believe all the threats I was receiving. But this is not just limited to this, I’ve also experienced this when talking about sexual assault and suicide, in real life.

Why do you think this happens and have you ever experienced this?

The only times I have been told (or it has been implied) that I should not express an opinion is on the subject of medical/health woo.

If someone posts about dealing with suspected cancer by using Florinda’s Herbal Colon Cleanse and you advise not doing that and seeing a physician instead, it could be seen as mean and unsupportive. :frowning:

Why are you worried about what happened on another forum?
You want opinions, this might not be the right forum.

Because politics and education does not trigger the same level of emotion as sex, suicide, or misusing children.

People who are emotionally engaged on a topic are less likely to debate than people who are only intellectually engaged.

Two subjects that scare people is paedophilia and incest mainly because it involves children and their reaction when faced with the subject is to feel violence to a level they do not think they are capable. When I was a young lad I knew about funny feller and to keep away from him, but it was not until in my early twenties that I found out that some one I knew was interfering with young children that I knew, if I could have got my hands on him I would have killed him, luckily he went to prison before that happened. Around twenty years later I was having a drink in my local pub when he walked in, he spotted me and could not get out fast enough, the hatred and revulsion I felt for him was still there. As a volunteer youth worker I came into contact with victims of incest a subject that makes you want to throw up. Yes because I have some contact with the subjects I can discuss them rationally but only with people who have some knowledge of the subject

Try having an opinion inappropriate to your audience about young children - i.e. nursing, staying home, cloth diapers, center vs. home daycare, vaccinations.

There are some forums and some audiences where the community standard is strictly enforced about certain topics. Politics in the right forum can be that (didn’t we have someone start recently who got booted from a left leaning forum for saying that perhaps Bernie wouldn’t be able to follow through).

It’s a method of thought control. We’ve all experienced it and many accept the pressures of groupthink.

You are allowed to have opinions and discuss them. But if you express an opinion, you have to be prepared for people to disagree with you.

The problem you, and many other people, seem to have is the belief that all ideas are equal and should be given equal weight in the discussion. They aren’t and they shouldn’t be. For a certain period of time, the media was enamored of the idea that any crackpot jackass conspiracy theory should be given equal time and weight as reasoned experts. Now we are starting to see the fruits of that policy and they are realizing it was a very stupid idea.

With all due respect, this seems awfully facile.

People are usually quick to correct other people when they are out of line in their reactions. Most people therefore restrain themselves in conversation.
When they are sure that the vast majority of others also disagree, some think they don’t have to restrain themselves and that they are free to hate. Often contests in who can show their hate the most occur. It is a chance at white knighting, showing off to the others how vehemently you disagree with the commonly disagreed upon subject.
IOW cheap scoring points.

First of all, your right to express your opinion also applies to other people. They have the right to express that your opinion is offensive to them. Freedom of speech does NOT include freedom from the consequences of that speech, and if you act like it does you will come across as rather entitled.

Second, some people have been victims of sexual assault or paedophilia, and they will have very strong and very negative views on the topic. To you, it’s an interesting topic for conversation. To them, its a reminder of being a victim of a crime. Expecting those people to calmly debate the subject seems a bit naive at best. Arguing with them is pointless, since you can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.

Finally, know your audience. If I tell holocaust jokes in my circle of friends, I might get some laughs. If I told the same jokes in a synagogue, I might get beaten. Same principle applies on the internet. If you don’t know the culture, and if you don’t want strong negative opinions, then maybe you shouldn’t post controversial things there.

For what it’s worth, I do agree with your opinion of paedophilia. I once had a friend who was a celibate paedophile. He committed suicide a few years ago, and his suicide note repeatedly mentioned that he was tired of feeling like a monster for a disease he didn’t ask for. That disease made his life a living hell, and it’s truly a fate I wouldn’t wish on anyone. However, because of the three points above, I don’t usually talk about it on the internet. Far too many people are convinced that the only treatment worth considering for paedophiles is a bullet.

On the issue of pedophiles, I think every generation seems some target that they can unabashedly hate. It has been left-handers, witches, gays, Nazis, communists in the past, and now it’s pedophiles. I suppose it’s an improvement in that at least we’re targeting people who’ve actually done something wrong, but it isn’t any more rational. There’s also the problem that rehabilitation is more theoretical than possible - repeat offenses are quite likely.

But surely you can recognize that the response is irrational and that you’re prompting that kind of reaction? You can’t provoke an emotional response on a hot-button issue and then complain that you didn’t get a well-reasoned rational debate instead. Might as well go around throwing snakes at people.

Honestly, you can’t even use the term pedophilia in a discussion for the simple fact that people don’t even know what it means anymore.

“Allowed” is the wrong word to use.

Actually, far too many people would consider a bullet too merciful - pedophiles are a group a certain slice of humanity feels deserves hideous prolonged torture. As I recently told someone, I just don’t have that much hate in me for anyone. Apparently some people do.

I get that parents want to defend their children from harm, and child predators earn a special level of hate, but some reactions seem over the top to me, just frothing-at-the-mouth hysteria. Which is why I don’t normally engage such people on the topic.

Is it? There are numerous examples of people knowing full well the merits of an argument who use as a tactic language that demonizes the advocate of a topic. The goal isn’t to advance knowledge or even have an honest dialogue it’s to silence via social shaming unpopular views.

The thing is like other sexual orientations the way a brain is wired is not the fault of the person the brain resides in. Now acting on this is problematic but to treat sexual orientation as choice seems to be inconsistent.

NM too inflammatory

Including you, apparently. Being a paedophile does not mean you’ve done something wrong. There is a distinct difference between being a paedophile and being a child molester. One is suffering from mental illness, the other is a criminal. There is overlap, but far less than you think. The majority of the time, sexual abuse of children happens at the hands of a non-paedophile. I’m not looking up the cites on my work computer, but if you go to the wikipedia page for Child Sexual Abuse you can find them in the references.

Yes, yes they do. As I’ve stated, I don’t talk about the subject on the internet much for good reason. I totally believe the OP receiving threats, as I received those too. I’ve been doxxed and received death threats addressed to me by my real name, not my on-line handle. The hate is very, very, real.

Pedophilia and spouse abuse is all well and good, but Og forbid if you step up in favor of declawing cats!

I hate to threadjack,but could you give us some definite examples of media approved crack-pottery that is now regrettable? I don’t doubt you, but I would like a concrete example, as a cautionary tale. FWIW, the media may seem to humor some crack-pottery sometimes, but if it does, I don’t expect it to regret it in short or long term.

Perhaps, back in the 90’s I once read Yahoo news reporting on zero energy, and the ration world was saved by, of all things, Slashdot (dang, I’m old.) Is that what you mean?