[Oni]

On Sinisterly, we've had numerous discussions on Pedophilia (because of a couple members) and I thought it was worth bringing up again. Again, this is the Serious Discussion section - so keep it serious.

My stance has always been that while a pedophile's attraction is morally wrong, a pedophile shouldn't be put under government watch or mistreated. Why? Because I've always seen the attraction as a physical or developmental problem. Not only that, but there's no reason to believe that they have committed a crime or done anything wrong. Just like a homosexual, a pedophile does not have much of a choice in sexuality. If you told me being a heterosexual was a problem -- oh boy, we'd have a problem! So, a couple of minutes ago I looked into it. Sure enough, I wasn't the first to say this, and several people had done research.



I'd agree with many of Dr. Cantor's suggestions and I find his discoveries very interesting. With these discoveries, society needs to change how pedophilia is dealt with. What do you guys think?

[BreShiE]

There's a huge difference between having a sexual attraction to children, and then having sexual intercourse with children. No Oni, you're not the first to say this. In fact, most pedofiles use this as their excuse. Are homosexuals having sex with underveloped bodies who aren't mentally or phisically capable of understanding or handling sexual emotions and/or sexual exploitations? No. A childs body and mind is not capable of handling such things.

If you spend time on 4chan, there is actually a lot of discussion on people there who have been sexually seducted and molested before and some of the stories I have read are shocking and nauseating to say the least. The fact that pedophiles have attractions and sexual feelings towards minors is not the problem for me. The problem for me is that they force and seduce children into exploiting themselves for the pleasure of the pedofile. This will fuck with a kids head. I have several minors in my family and I couldn't even dream of that level of harm being committed against them. I would flip shit if I found out something like that happened to them. We suspected that my cousin was actually being molested, and I was ready to kick the cunts head in, but it was just a big misunderstanind in the end.

The fact of the matter is, it's morally wrong. I cannot comprehend what goes through ones mind to even begin to think about harming a child in that way. I have had several discussions with BlueScreen about this. If it's a child exploiring themselves sexually, I think that's funny and kind-of cute in a way, but when a sexually developed adolescent or fully developed man having to manipulate and coerce a child into performing sexual acts is fucking wrong, no matter how you look at it.

tl;dr Yes, they can't help the feelings, but they can help what they do to a child.

[Oni]

There's a huge difference between having a sexual attraction to children, and then having sexual intercourse with children. No Oni, you're not the first to say this. In fact, most pedofiles use this as their excuse. Are homosexuals having sex with underveloped bodies who aren't mentally or phisically capable of understanding or handling sexual emotions and/or sexual exploitations? No. A childs body and mind is not capable of handling such things.

If you spend time on 4chan, there is actually a lot of discussion on people there who have been sexually seducted and molested before and some of the stories I have read are shocking and nauseating to say the least. The fact that pedophiles have attractions and sexual feelings towards minors is not the problem for me. The problem for me is that they force and seduce children into exploiting themselves for the pleasure of the pedofile. This will fuck with a kids head. I have several minors in my family and I couldn't even dream of that level of harm being committed against them. I would flip shit if I found out something like that happened to them. We suspected that my cousin was actually being molested, and I was ready to kick the cunts head in, but it was just a big misunderstanind in the end.

The fact of the matter is, it's morally wrong. I cannot comprehend what goes through ones mind to even begin to think about harming a child in that way. I have had several discussions with BlueScreen about this. If it's a child exploiring themselves sexually, I think that's funny and kind-of cute in a way, but when a sexually developed adolescent or fully developed man having to manipulate and coerce a child into performing sexual acts is fucking wrong, no matter how you look at it.

tl;dr Yes, they can't help the feelings, but they can help what they do to a child.

I am by no means justifying rape or the actions of convicts. I am, however, suggesting a different approach to how we address the issue at hand. Not all pedophiles act on desire and are still thought of as "evil" or "predatory". I believe that, at the end of the day, pedophiles are still human and should be treated as such.

[Satan]

I disagree with not keeping pedophiles on a watch list/Registered Sex Offenders.

Their main attraction is to children, who are not sexually mature, cannot be held accountable for their decisions, nor should ever have to make those decisions.

Treating it as a sexual orientation and saying that it is okay is saying it is okay for them to have sex with children.

I'm not saying this because of religious objection, spiritual objection, way I was raised, etc.

What they do, and what they are attracted to, deals with children. Children should not be exposed to that sort of thing, it damages the way they think, and the way they develop, as pretty much proven by any case of pedophilia and a pedophile being charged, there are mental repercussions, even when the child "consents", for lack of a better term, given they legally cannot consent.

As far as child pornography goes, if its drawn, animated, 3d rendered, I'd be okay with that aspect changing, as long as it is not harming a child.
No real child pornography, modeling, etc.
So many sites have "soft-core" child porn because its "art" to take pictures of them naked, full well knowing it is a product that people will use to sexually gratify themselves. That bit needs to change.

I do not accept it as a sexual orientation, as homosexuality, bisexuality, heterosexuality, etc is. You cannot compare homosexuality to pedophilia when homosexuality is a sexual orientation, that is, sexual or romantic feelings towards someone of a gender, and pedophilia is not.

I would classify it more as a fetish.
If not a mental disorder.

That's my opinion at least.

[Mom]

I can go into philosophical explanation in deconstructing the moral values we built and how that forms are psychology to begin with to invalidate most of what Breshie said but that would be kind of off topic and, let's be honest, anyone with half a brain could do the same anyways.

I would have to agree, through my own viewpoint, that there's little wrong in LIKING it. Everyone has some weird crazy shit going on. For gods sake there's people who get off on outright murder.
But that's where there's the hick. These people don't go out and murder (most don't), they just go about and kinda live a normal life, indulge thanks to the bounties of the internet, and etc.
That kind of thing I'm fine with. Child pornography is abhorrent, but attacking the people who take it instead of those who make it is just something idiotic and, honestly, maybe this is invalidated psychology, but by shutting down that outlet, you're really screwing up further.

It's a slippery slope, and I admit to being undecided but the only thing I can say for sure is:
You like that shit, fine. As long as you don't get grabby then everything's fine and dandy. And if it's on the internet, AKA: Something produced that shouldn't be, but it IS, then that should be left alone. Let people do their thing.

For fucks sake there's a site completely based on the released videos of murders. I mean I'm sorry, but the taking of a life is right up there with active pedophilia, but hey, let everyone watch someone get their head sawed off. That's coolio.

I say it basically once again:
Like what you like, as long as you understand what you shouldn't act on, then it's fine. Stop flipping shit bricks for things that haven't happened.

I would classify it more as a fetish.

I would say more a fetish and an unconfirmed mental disorder simply because people don't know what a mental disorder is anymore.
Homosexuality just left the mental disorder classification not long ago for God's sake.

[Satan]

Not all pedophiles act on desire and are still thought of as "evil" or "predatory". I believe that, at the end of the day, pedophiles are still human and should be treated as such.

To expand on my previous post

I believe, as long as they are keeping to themselves and not harming a child, (lolicon, 3d rendered hentai, etc), then it would be acceptable to let them live as they see fit.

However, the second true child pornography touches their computer, or they view it for sexual self-gratification, that is when the hammer drops, because they are then supporting a child being exploited and harmed.

[Oni]

I disagree with not keeping pedophiles on a watch list/Registered Sex Offenders.

Their main attraction is to children, who are not sexually mature, cannot be held accountable for their decisions, nor should ever have to make those decisions.

Treating it as a sexual orientation and saying that it is okay is saying it is okay for them to have sex with children.

I'm not saying this because of religious objection, spiritual objection, way I was raised, etc.

What they do, and what they are attracted to, deals with children. Children should not be exposed to that sort of thing, it damages the way they think, and the way they develop, as pretty much proven by any case of pedophilia and a pedophile being charged, there are mental repercussions, even when the child "consents", for lack of a better term, given they legally cannot consent.

As far as child pornography goes, if its drawn, animated, 3d rendered, I'd be okay with that aspect changing, as long as it is not harming a child.
No real child pornography, modeling, etc.
So many sites have "soft-core" child porn because its "art" to take pictures of them naked, full well knowing it is a product that people will use to sexually gratify themselves. That bit needs to change.

I do not accept it as a sexual orientation, as homosexuality, bisexuality, heterosexuality, etc is. You cannot compare homosexuality to pedophilia when homosexuality is a sexual orientation, that is, sexual or romantic feelings towards someone of a gender, and pedophilia is not.

I would classify it more as a fetish.
If not a mental disorder.

That's my opinion at least.

I compare them because it's not easy (if even possible) to change what a person is sexually attracted to. I fully acknowledge and emphasize that doing something out of pedophilia is illegal (and morally wrong).

[Mom]

To expand on my previous post

I believe, as long as they are keeping to themselves and not harming a child, (lolicon, 3d rendered hentai, etc), then it would be acceptable to let them live as they see fit.

However, the second true child pornography touches their computer, or they view it for sexual self-gratification, that is when the hammer drops, because they are then supporting a child being exploited and harmed.

While, again, I agree child pornography as a crime against nature itself, this statement is still rather, for lack of better word, defeatist.
It's using the same logic many vegetarians and "green" people use which is just backwards.
I hate to break it to you but just because some people stop, doesn't make the whole operation stop, not unless you shut down the source OR stop everyone guilty of watching it at the same time with a 100% rate.
In fact, some people like it just plainly because it is illegal, adding onto that whole watching population.

[BreShiE]

To expand on my previous post

I believe, as long as they are keeping to themselves and not harming a child, (lolicon, 3d rendered hentai, etc), then it would be acceptable to let them live as they see fit.

However, the second true child pornography touches their computer, or they view it for sexual self-gratification, that is when the hammer drops, because they are then supporting a child being exploited and harmed.

Exactly my point.

[Oni]

While, again, I agree child pornography as a crime against nature itself, this statement is still rather, for lack of better word, defeatist.
It's using the same logic many vegetarians and "green" people use which is just backwards.
I hate to break it to you but just because some people stop, doesn't make the whole operation stop, not unless you shut down the source OR stop everyone guilty of watching it at the same time with a 100% rate.
In fact, some people like it just plainly because it is illegal, adding onto that whole watching population.

Similar to how things are going with copyright content, torrenting, and such...