Segregation's son is homophobia whom has just been convicted of pedophilia!

[Weaver]

ephebophilia (Jailbait- 16-18)

I think what's interesting about this is tons of western countries have their age of consent between 14 - 16. America is actually on the high end (though not the highest) at 18.

I really think what needs to happen is society should be supporting mental treatment or psychiatric evaluation of them. Greece treats it as a disorder and tries to help them as best they can. In other countries you would just be thrown in jail.

 

[lord canti]

While I believe nobody should ever be punished for something they have no control over until it hurt others. I would be lying if I said I would be comfortable letting my kids be around someone who admitted to me they were sexually attracted to kids at least alone.

 

[JoJo]

What about Ancient Greece and their young male prostitutes? Didn't we get the word "pederasty" from them?

And regardless of a minimum age limit, paedophilia is practically accepted in the Middle East, due to the prophet Muhammad marrying and consummating his marriage with Aisha at age 9 being used as a justification for child brides.

Pedophilia is relative. That's what "minimum age limit" meant. In every society there's always a threshold you can't cross; ours isn't sacred.

Not necessarily. If we're talking strict definitions, paedophilia is defined medically as when an adult is primarily attracted to prepubescent children, can be exclusive or non-exclusive. That definition is of course created by humans as a convenient label, but it isn't relative, puberty is perfectly quantifiable. I think what you mean is age of consent is relative between countries and continents, which is correct of course.

Similarly this ties with Senare's point about many, perhaps even a majority, of child molesters don't actually meet the clinical definition of paedophilia. Rather, many people who abuse children are simply indiscriminate and target kids because they are convenient and easy to control rather than having a primary attraction to them. These molesters usually target family members, note that most abuse does happen within the family, whereas true paedophiles apparently tend to prefer non-related children.

 

[Alistar_Helloise]

snip

Then why list them in that order?

snip

I've spent more time alone than most people ever will. I remember being at college when somebody asked how much time I spend alone, after working it out it came to 90 hours a week. After college it turned it to 106 hours a week.

Being either alone or lonely isn't bad, "I think it?s very healthy to spend time alone. You need to know how to be alone and not be defined by another person" says Olivia Wilde, though I don't think it's the famous tv actress. I often think I spend too much time alone but it's so nice being alone.

Some people have easier peace with being alone than others, I am not one of those people who has made peace with being alone.

 

[ThreeName]

Not necessarily. If we're talking strict definitions, paedophilia is defined medically as when an adult is primarily attracted to prepubescent children, can be exclusive or non-exclusive. That definition is of course created by humans as a convenient label, but it isn't relative, puberty is perfectly quantifiable. I think what you mean is age of consent is relative between countries and continents, which is correct of course.

Similarly this ties with Senare's point about many, perhaps even a majority, of child molesters don't actually meet the clinical definition of paedophilia. Rather, many people who abuse children are simply indiscriminate and target kids because they are convenient and easy to control rather than having a primary attraction to them. These molesters usually target family members, note that most abuse does happen within the family, whereas true paedophiles apparently tend to prefer non-related children.

Medically speaking yes, you're correct; I was just using the layman's definition of "The criminal/immoral sexual attraction to young people", where "young people" is the relative part.

 

[BeeGeenie]

What about Ancient Greece and their young male prostitutes? Didn't we get the word "pederasty" from them?

And regardless of a minimum age limit, paedophilia is practically accepted in the Middle East, due to the prophet Muhammad marrying and consummating his marriage with Aisha at age 9 being used as a justification for child brides.

Pedophilia is relative. That's what "minimum age limit" meant. In every society there's always a threshold you can't cross; ours isn't sacred.

Not necessarily. If we're talking strict definitions, paedophilia is defined medically as when an adult is primarily attracted to prepubescent children, can be exclusive or non-exclusive. That definition is of course created by humans as a convenient label, but it isn't relative, puberty is perfectly quantifiable. I think what you mean is age of consent is relative between countries and continents, which is correct of course.

Similarly this ties with Senare's point about many, perhaps even a majority, of child molesters don't actually meet the clinical definition of paedophilia. Rather, many people who abuse children are simply indiscriminate and target kids because they are convenient and easy to control rather than having a primary attraction to them. These molesters usually target family members, note that most abuse does happen within the family, whereas true paedophiles apparently tend to prefer non-related children.

Those are interesting points. I actually have a friend that was recently arrested for video voyeurism and possession of child porn because he snuck a spy cam into the public restroom at work (we were roommates at the time, and I never suspected anything). I wondered if he was getting off on thrill of voyeurism, or was he legitimately attracted to the little boys? Would he have been spying on grown women if he thought he could get away with it? (Still pretty darn creep, but clearly not pedophilic)
A cop asked me if I'd suspected he was gay, as if that would have had anything to do with it.
He self-identifies as heterosexual, and when he got caught he expressed relief that he could finally get help dealing with his "fetish", since talking about it to anyone before the arrest would have been problematic, so it's clearly not exclusive.

Even though he never touched anybody and none of the victims were even aware of what he did, he's still going to serve time and be on the sex offender registry for life. He's convinced he'll never have a relationship, a social life, or a good job ever again because of the stigma.

All-in-all, it was a pretty surreal experience. Human sexuality is much more complex than our legal system is able to account for.

 

[Olas]

I'd just like to point out that the same logic could be applied to anyone with a dangerous, unhealthy, or socially taboo paraphilia, pedophilia simply being one of the most infamous examples. It has to suck big time, and there's nothing anyone can do about it, but at least the internet has given these people a possible outlet so they don't have to act on their urges in real life.

If you were a pedophile before the internet you were really screwed.

While I believe nobody should ever be punished for something they have no control over until it hurt others. I would be lying if I said I would be comfortable letting my kids be around someone who admitted to me they were sexually attracted to kids at least alone.

While I understand why you would feel that way and can't exactly blame you for it, there is a difference between being attracted to kids, and automatically trying to molest any kids you come across. It's not like every time you're near an a person of the opposite gender[footnote]or same gender if you're gay or course[/footnote] you immediately begin flirting with them on the spot in hopes of getting laid.

The mindset that all pedophiles are creepy perverted sex hungry animals feels awfully similar to the homophobic caricatures of gays decades ago.

Yes, it must suck to be a pedophile.

It must also suck to be one of those people who'd really enjoy burning down large buildings, because we don't allow that either.

Yes, you're right, it would suck to be someone with either of those two urges. But, while I'm no psychologist, I think the latter is typically more likely to be psychosomatic and therefore more treatable through therapy. At least those people can seek help and possibly overcome their problem.

 

[GabeZhul]

What really irks me about this issue is how lolicons are often equated with pedophiles while the two things are actually quite different, and not just in the obvious "One is real, the other is drawn." aspect (not that even something as obvious as that doesn't escape the legislators, but I digress).

Case in point; I am not attracted to children but my "type" just happens to be short women with flat/small busts. Because of that I would probably qualify to be a lolicon, since loli characters in anime, eroge and doujins are the embodiment of those details, and yet if someone would get a hold of my browser history I could be convicted for pedophilia in certain countries just for that, which is about is stupid as it gets...

 

[Zontar]

Now, I know this is off topic, and when it comes to major issues in the US I'm an outsider looking in, but when you say America has gotten past segregation, do you mean purely in the legal or is the social one? Because when I look at the numbers it seems that property values going down in a suburb when visible minorities moves in is still a problem even today. Now again I'd like to reiterate I'm just an outsider looking in, so if anyone can show me this isn't the case I'd like to see it.

 

[Doclector]

I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times, mental health needs to be less ignored. By society, by government funding, by health authorities, it needs to be seen as serious as any physical problem.

Paedophilia could be considered a sexual orientation, but unlike homosexuality, it harms someone else, a child who couldn't possibly fully understand or be emotionally ready for that sort of thing. Like other urges that harm someone else, such as urges to murder or steal, it would be necessary to treat them as mental illness.

Hell, who knows? If we paid more attention to mental health, maybe people would recieve treatment before things spiralled down to that point.

 

[lord canti]

I'd just like to point out that the same logic could be applied to anyone with a dangerous, unhealthy, or socially taboo paraphilia, pedophilia simply being one of the most infamous examples. It has to suck big time, and there's nothing anyone can do about it, but at least the internet has given these people a possible outlet so they don't have to act on their urges in real life.

If you were a pedophile before the internet you were really screwed.

While I believe nobody should ever be punished for something they have no control over until it hurt others. I would be lying if I said I would be comfortable letting my kids be around someone who admitted to me they were sexually attracted to kids at least alone.

While I understand why you would feel that way and can't exactly blame you for it, there is a difference between being attracted to kids, and automatically trying to molest any kids you come across. It's not like every time you're near an a person of the opposite gender[footnote]or same gender if you're gay or course[/footnote] you immediately begin flirting with them on the spot in hopes of getting laid.

The mindset that all pedophiles are creepy perverted sex hungry animals feels awfully similar to the homophobic caricatures of gays decades ago.

Yes, it must suck to be a pedophile.

It must also suck to be one of those people who'd really enjoy burning down large buildings, because we don't allow that either.

Yes, you're right, it would suck to be someone with either of those two urges. But, while I'm no psychologist, I think the latter is typically more likely to be psychosomatic and therefore more treatable through therapy. At least those people can seek help and possibly overcome their problem.

Oh I understand that perfectly there will just always be that part of me that will be highly uncomfortable leaving my kids a lone with them. which I do kind of feel guilty about.

 

[TakerFoxx]

I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times, mental health needs to be less ignored. By society, by government funding, by health authorities, it needs to be seen as serious as any physical problem.

Paedophilia could be considered a sexual orientation, but unlike homosexuality, it harms someone else, a child who couldn't possibly fully understand or be emotionally ready for that sort of thing. Like other urges that harm someone else, such as urges to murder or steal, it would be necessary to treat them as mental illness.

Hell, who knows? If we paid more attention to mental health, maybe people would recieve treatment before things spiralled down to that point.

But see, that's the thing. While I'm sure your position is well-intentioned, if you were to assume pedophilia is a mental disorder because someone is harmed whenever its carried out but claim homosexuality is a harmless orientation because no one is harmed, you run into a problem, in that if pedophilia actually is an orientation that just so happens to have an unfortunate target of attraction it cannot be treated like a mental disorder. Homosexuality was once considered a mental disorder as well, and a whole lot of harm was done while attempting to "treat" it. And as it so happens, people have been trying to to treat pedophiles for years, but aside from certain methods to help compulsive child molesters control themselves (i.e. people with an actual mental problem), no workable treatment for those who are simply attracted to children has been found, save for removing their sex drive entirely. And as many pedophiles will attest to, they have no problem keeping themselves under control, just as most heterosexuals can be around people of the opposite sex and homosexuals can be around people of the same sex and not have a problem. The only real difference is that they (assuming they're exclusively pedophiles, as non-exclusives exist as well), unfortunately, drew the short straw of orientations and are attracted to people who they simply cannot not have relationships with.

Of course, if in the future an actual mental cause for pedophilia is found along with a way to treat it, then yeah, you'll be right. But for now, no such proof that it's a mental disorder exists (though according to Wikipedia, child molesters do seem to have many common traits), and assuming it is can be problematic.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

What about Ancient Greece and their young male prostitutes? Didn't we get the word "pederasty" from them?

Other times, other morals. That's the gist of it. For a long time during Greece's development, it was considered appropriate to have a kid under your wing. Having a go at it with it wasn't so much exploitation as it was seen as a form of sexual education. The pederast in the pairing did a lot more than just bugger the kid on occasion - he took care of its education, physical training and general preparedness towards civilian life. Having sex with dudes whilst being a dude was seen as being a less intimidating introduction to the concept of having a sex life - a kind of intro to general libido before you'd pair yourself off with your wife-to-be.

The Romans had a similar concept, in the form of the "Puer Delicatus" or "Delicate Boy". You raised a kid in the exact same way as the Greeks. If you couldn't or wouldn't sire children, then your protégé could eventually be considered as such - or at least as your inheritor.

Of course, none of this would fly nowadays.

 

[GabeZhul]

What really irks me about this issue is how lolicons are often equated with pedophiles while the two things are actually quite different, and not just in the obvious "One is real, the other is drawn." aspect (not that even something as obvious as that doesn't escape the legislators, but I digress).

Case in point; I am not attracted to children but my "type" just happens to be short women with flat/small busts. Because of that I would probably qualify to be a lolicon, since loli characters in anime, eroge and doujins are the embodiment of those details, and yet if someone would get a hold of my browser history I could be convicted for pedophilia in certain countries just for that, which is about is stupid as it gets...

Err, you know that lolicon is done to make it look like small kids right? Not just petite women, but actual little kids?

Errr... Yes. So? How does that relate to anything I said? I am honestly stumped, as I have been sitting over your two sentences for over ten minutes now and I cannot make heads or tails about what you are actually trying to say. I mean, what does the artist's intentions have anything to do with why "I" personally find their drawn characters attractive or not?

Yes, lolies are drawn to look young. Duh. Some younger than others even. But the thing is, there is literally only one way to draw a petite/young anime style character thanks to the fact that they are stylized to hell and back, meaning that their appearance is boiled down to most primal archetypes, namely short stature, small chest and low head/body ratio. If you might recall, that also happens to be my type (well, not the head/body ratio, but then again, we are talking about stylized art here), a type I find attractive not because of they remind of children, but because a small stature represents fragility and delicacy to me.

Also, if we are at that, I would say that there are actually no "petite women" in Japanese media. What I mean by that is that in Japanese media there are generally only three female body-types: The mature femme-fatale with huge breasts and ridiculously long legs, the high-school girl with large breasts and average height and everything smaller than that immediately gets branded "loli".