Why are there laws against paedophilia?

Post Reply New Topic

Barbarian. Oh, wait. Conan or Red Sonja might take offense.

Idiot.

It means attraction to pre-pubescents, for what it's worth.

Hell yes!
I'm a suvivor of abuse myself and even though I have been to counciling, I still have alot of issues from it.
Do understand why I feel anyone who molestes a child should be exterminated.

Revenge is a dish best eaten cold.

ruveyn

^^ just like sushi.

Yes, pedophiles aren't child molesters although some pedophiles can molest a child.
A lot of pedophiles are sickened by their inclinations, because they "know, that pedophiles are perverts". There is also a lot o pedophiles, who are ok with their inclinations. Note that I don't mean that they are ok with having sex with children. Being ok with being attracted by children and being ok with having sex with children are two different things.
Sexual attraction to children is sometimes considered a pathology, sometimes it's not. See for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#Diagnostic_criteria. "Curing" pedophilia doesn't seem to be successful, a part of pedophiles consider pedophilia to be a part of their personality. In these aspects pedophilia is pretty similar to homosexuality. Which usually isn't considered a disorder today. Even if you consider pedophilia a disorder, calling pedophiles sick is like calling aspies sick. English is not my native language, but I wouldn't use word sick in this meaning.
PS There is another similarity between pedophilia and homosexuality. Homosexual people can also be sickened by their inclinations, some of them even commit suicide. Whether they are or not is strongly affected by the opinion of society they live in.

Exactly. Although it is an unpopular topic, the most current trends in combatting unwanted SSA do not aim directly at trying to change sexual orientation. Sure, there are SOME cases in which ex-gays believe that they have fully changed orientation. But the goal is more typically altering the subject's response to a given predisposition. If it is a faith-based program, the distinction is drawn between temptation and acting on it, together with strategies for dealing with it, such as choosing celibacy or trying to find any kind of attraction at all to the opposite sex and possibly start a family. The alternative is generally seen as a bad idea but may be successful for some individuals (it's a bad idea in the same sense it is a bad idea to ask a chronically straight person to "just try" being a homosexual). In American society there is increasing support for those with SSA within the LGBT community, and the reason is obvious (they encourage acceptance of one's own orientation). It is possible to support people fighting unwanted SSA in the faith community without violating matters of conscience. It's just that the faith community has been slow in finding the best and most appropriate response.

In that sense, pedophilia is not different at all. When you consider that anti-bullying efforts risk disproportionately favoring homosexual or sexually confused children, you have to accept that a consequence, intended or not, is encouraging sexual activity among the very young. You also have to accept the possibility that a pre-teen could possibly become attracted to an adult. If consensual sex is morally acceptable, then we have to re-evaluate whether our current AOC laws are correctly rooted in reality and whether sex with, say, a WILLING 11-year-old is really a problem.

My thing is, I personally wouldn't do something like that. I can see plenty wrong with it, as do most people in general. But I just have to call shens on our justification for treating perverts the way we do. Some see delisting homosexual orientation as pathological as politically motivated and that there is still plenty of reason to believe that it is aberrant and even pathological. Some see non-monogamy as immoral and harmful to society, but laws regarding sexual activity, to include heterosexual sex, have been either struck down or they're just unenforced. Which leads me to believe that there is little actual justification for considering pedophilia pathological or criminal, especially when sex with a child involves someone who is perhaps sexually precocious and likely to make willing consent to have sex with an adult. An adult might even be a preferable partner since being more sexually experienced and less likely to cause harm than a younger person more concerned with self-gratification than the safety and well-being of the other. After all, parents often have loving relationships with their children, though in a different sense. Why is it impossible for this to be the case in sexual relationships?

I say if we intend to continue to label the behaviors of active pedophiles as aberrant or demented, we should do it in a way that keeps us from being hypocrites. Rather than scarlet-letter them for the rest of their lives, there needs to be some kind of viable treatment options to bring the behavior under control. Since they cannot be around children, there needs to be separate communities or colonies apart from the general public to meet basic needs (food, shelter, etc.) while still allowing freedom/avoiding incarceration and allowing community support in order to shield them societal bullying. Speaking out against them should be considered hate-speech and every effort towards suicide prevention has to be made.

If that's unreasonable, then at the very least I think we should reevaluate why it is we think pedophilia is so awful.

A paedophile can move to the South, become a school administrator, and get his jollies by compelling children and adolescents to present their rumps to him for his beating pleasure.

Are you thinking about moving to the South?

No way.

I don't think talking about 'willingness' on the part of an 11 year old child is meaningful or helpful. Some (a minority) people might be able to consent at 15, but 11 is really too young - if not only because pregnancy would seriously damage a girl at that age.

Ah, you know you want to! All this talk about children and adolescents presenting their rumps... I think you've thought long and hard about this. Cum see what you're missing out on with all that hot, southern "beating pleasure." And if you're lucky, you might even find some WHITE boys and girls all too willing to go bottoms-up for you.

Or if you want to spank some more exotic booty, we do have a tribal boarding school on the reservation, all within very short driving distance of the best Native American casinos in the nation. Aint NUTHIN like spankin' that Choctaw @$$! You need to tap that sh!t.

If a girl were submissively to bend over and present to me her rump, then I might enjoy fondling it, softly stroking it, gently caressing it, and possibly a few other things.

As for beating her rump until it blisters: really not my thing at all.

If I gently fondle the buttocks of a girl who is underage, then I am going to jail. If a principal flogs her buttocks to the point where she can't sit down for a few days, then the principal is a local hero. Of course, an individual with a sadistic personality disorder is going to be attracted to the job of Principal in a Southern school.

Well, you can't have it both ways. You can smack that @$$, be a local hero, and avoid jail time, all the while going home after work and relaxing with a shot of Southern Comfort over ice. How much closer to heaven can you get?

For what it's worth, and in all seriousness, leaving bruises is crossing the line if you must allow physical punishment. I don't personally object to paddling, but past a certain age I just don't see the point.

I'll also go ahead with this: Public schools in Mississippi are as backwards as you can get. As someone who has worked in public school systems, there are reasons why I'm no longer a classroom teacher. And those reasons have nothing to do with the kids!

That would be one way the schools could make some money. Every week, the principal sentences a number of youths to paddling. Then, the school auctions off the administration of the paddling to members of the community. They could also either auction off the right to witness the paddling, or perform the paddlings in the auditorium, and sell tickets.

I do, however, appreciate the willingness of Southern Belles to bend over and present their rumps.

Yeah, me too! You just have to actually CATCH them first. Given my sorry state of social ineptitude, I consider myself disproportionately fortunate. Did you know Robert E. Lee had a cousin by the same name? Well, my kids now share the same family tree as a CSA general!