The Victims of Homosexuality

[The White Hunter]

I'd expected something rather different from the title and was expecting to strongly disagree with the OP.

Sorry to disappoint

I too had rolled up my sleeves at the title and began to ponder how best to go about ripping the OP down.

But alas you have spoiled my fun, touche` good man, touche`.

Shame we're still in a world where this kind of thinking isn't the norm

 

[Catie Caraco]

or non-molesting pedophile

Ok, this is the bit I can't agree on. Non-molesting or no, these people shouldn't get a free pass unless they are doing something to deal with their problems. Most child molesters started out as non-molesting. Many consider themselves "child lovers" and don't think what they are doing is harmful to the child. Bullshit. These people need counseling and possibly chemical castration.

That's pretty disgusting, castrating someone for the possibility that they may do something.

Thought police ho!

Chemical castration is not the same as actually removing any body parts. I didn't say it was necessary in all cases, but some people who recognize pedophilia in themselves actively seek out this treatment because they don't want to be sexually attracted to children. Right now that is best we have for these people, since we can't rewire their brains, and we don't know enough about their brains to help them otherwise. What better solution do you have?

 

[Gearhead mk2]

Thank god. I thought you were just another raging homophobe from the title, but its nice to see someone who's put some thought into it. I myself am not gay, but I live in Brighton which is pretty much the LGBT capital of Europe, and I'm sick and tired of people shouting how wrong it is, using fag as a general insult, claiming that all gays are coprophiliac(dont look it up) pedos that spread illness through mindless bonking. One of the ones that always gets me is how the "cure your gays" types say they are doing them a favour because gay people have higher suicide, illness and drug usage rates. YOU EVER WONDER WHY THAT IS?!?

 

[Gearhead mk2]

double post soz

 

[Fishyash]

Sorry for cutting in on an interesting discussion and removing the context of your post for just a few words but I just wanted to comment on this.

When people hear of murder or some equivalent crime they rarely care

This is actually very unsettling to me if this is true... Ending the life of an innocent human being is IMO one of the worst actions humanity can commit. It's very disconcerting to hear of people reacting to murder with uncaring or apathy.

 

[JoJo]

Two more quotes? Let's begin...

or non-molesting pedophile

Ok, this is the bit I can't agree on. Non-molesting or no, these people shouldn't get a free pass unless they are doing something to deal with their problems. Most child molesters started out as non-molesting. Many consider themselves "child lovers" and don't think what they are doing is harmful to the child. Bullshit. These people need counseling and possibly chemical castration.

It certainly doesn't help the homosexual/lesbian/bisexual/transgender cause by associating them with pedophiles. And truly, not all people should be treated with tolerance. We didn't treat the Nazis with tolerance. We don't, or shouldn't, treat bigots and misogynists with tolerance. Tolerance implies acceptance.

While I understand wanting to defend those with the tendencies who don't act on them, simply not acting on them isn't sufficient when the stakes are that high. And when we start tolerating and accepting it, it becomes the norm. I certainly don't want to bring a child into a world where its ok for people to sexualize them.

Nazis and bigots aren't a particularly good comparison as they choose to be that by their own free-will, whereas pedophilia is a mental illness which is no fault of the sufferer (though their actions are still their responsibility). As Matthew94 said, we aren't claiming that pedophilia is exactly equal to more conventional sexualities or that it doesn't require any treatment, but that simply the current stigma is too strong and counter-productive. Would you really want to get treatment for a condition which if it got out to the public would make you an outcast forever, or would you try to deal with it yourself instead with the added risks attached to that? It must be pretty terrible really to have to live with suppressing the strongest human desire for the sake of others by no fault of your own, whilst having many still calling you bad or twisted or deserving of imprisonment/death for that fact.

You think homosexuals get it bad, try transgender

I'm going to ask you this once, and with all due etiquette.

Please... don't... go there.

You're one the Escapist trangenders right? Yeah, I know this site (and generally the real world too) can be pretty intolerant but that's no reason to avoid the subject all together, I find it most perplexing that many people here fully tolerant of homosexuality oppose trangenderism. I haven't actually received any bad feedback (yet) about my inclusion of transgenders in my little list compared to some of the more controversial entries.

Edit: Fixed messed up quotes, now that makes more sense.

 

[Vault101]

Ive never seen anyone make a convicing argument against homosexuality...or even a non-religious one

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

No other fetish or sexual desire gets as much hate as pedophilia.

I'm not going to debate your comment with you (you are free of course to reply however you wish and this isn't a 'I get the last word!' post, I just simply don't personally wish to discuss it with you) but paedophilia is not just a sexual desire and it isn't a fetish. It is, by definition, a paraphilia (thus the "ilia"). A paraphilia is a sexual desire towards a persons unable to consent or without that persons' consent--rape, children, the dead, etc.--or a sexual attraction to situations or acts which cause harm to ones self or to others--sadism, for example.

I believe labeling it as anything less is shy of what it deserves.

or non-molesting pedophile

Ok, this is the bit I can't agree on. Non-molesting or no, these people shouldn't get a free pass unless they are doing something to deal with their problems. Most child molesters started out as non-molesting. Many consider themselves "child lovers" and don't think what they are doing is harmful to the child. Bullshit. These people need counseling and possibly chemical castration.

It certainly doesn't help the homosexual/lesbian/bisexual/transgender cause by associating them with pedophiles. And truly, not all people should be treated with tolerance. We didn't treat the Nazis with tolerance. We don't, or shouldn't, treat bigots and misogynists with tolerance. Tolerance implies acceptance.

While I understand wanting to defend those with the tendencies who don't act on them, simply not acting on them isn't sufficient when the stakes are that high. And when we start tolerating and accepting it, it becomes the norm. I certainly don't want to bring a child into a world where its ok for people to sexualize them.

Your post is one of the more thought provoking things I have read in a while. I consider myself a practicing Buddhist, believing pacifism and dialog the best road to peace. I'm far from perfect, so I am prone to bursts of anger and even hate just as much as anyone else (my OP shows as much, lol) but I always try to avoid ever really thinking along the lines your comment suggest, no matter the case.

That said, your post does make me think. Having been personally affected by a paedophile I have more bias than most and a solution to the problem of harm coming to children is something we all want. It makes me wonder if there is ever a time preemptive force is just. I'd like to say no and forget all about it, but it's tempting not to. It would feel cheap to cast aside all my beliefs for a solution to one problem. In a way I feel guilty for not instantly casting aside the thought.

Sorry if this comment seems jumbled or difficult to understand. I'm having trouble workding my exact thoughts.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Ive never seen anyone make a convicing argument against homosexuality...or even a non-religious one

To us they aren't convincing, but to people raised in an environment of hate (a religious family, for example) they have all the reason required.

It's the same as "we're better" being all that is needed for white supremacists to despise an African American. It's something we won't ever be able to truly understand, having not lived their life and something they will never be able to make us understand.

I say never, but perhaps that's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Vault101]

Ive never seen anyone make a convicing argument against homosexuality...or even a non-religious one

To us they aren't convincing, but to people raised in an environment of hate (a religious family, for example) they have all the reason required.

It's the same as "we're better" being all that is needed for white supremacists to despise an African American. It's something we won't ever be able to truly understand, having not lived their life and something they will never be able to make us understand.

I say never, but perhaps that's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

it annoys me when they say "Im being perfectly reasonable"

the only non-religious one Ive seen always seems to boil down to "I dont like teh gay..ewww" and you call them out on that they apeal to "politically correct bullshit! I say somthing different I get labelled as homphobic!" you cant call them out without being acused of ebing soem "PC self rightious ass"

ehh...anyway Im not assuming Im 100% correct eather

 

[Catie Caraco]

]Your post is one of the more thought provoking things I have read in a while. I consider myself a practicing Buddhist, believing pacifism and dialog the best road to peace. I'm far from perfect, so I am prone to bursts of anger and even hate just as much as anyone else (my OP shows as much, lol) but I always try to avoid ever really thinking along the lines your comment suggest, no matter the case.

That said, your post does make me think. Having been personally affected by a paedophile I have more bias than most and a solution to the problem of harm coming to children is something we all want. It makes me wonder if there is ever a time preemptive force is just. I'd like to say no and forget all about it, but it's tempting not to. It would feel cheap to cast aside all my beliefs for a solution to one problem. In a way I feel guilty for not instantly casting aside the thought.

Sorry if this comment seems jumbled or difficult to understand. I'm having trouble workding my exact thoughts.

I can't believe how much dislike my comment has garnered. While I myself haven't been a victim of pedophilia, I have spent time with children who were victims, and I have to admit that colors my view.

The fact of the matter is that it is nice to say "everything is acceptable" and we shouldn't demonize people who are different than us, but somewhere a line has to be drawn.

"No other fetish or sexual desire gets as much hate as pedophilia." says Matthew94. Well, as you replied, it's not a fetish, and it's not an OK desire. Sometimes when someone cuts me off while I'm driving I'd LOVE to smash into the back of their car. They had it coming, right? Wrong. Just because I have the desire to do it doesn't make it ok.

Somewhere we have to draw the line. Somewhere we have to say "No, that is not allowed." For me, pedophilia is that line. Also at that line are zoophilia and necrophilia.

I'm totally fine with any other sexual desire and fetish out there. Two grown men who are in love want to express it physically, go right ahead. Same with two women. Hell, if people can make polygamy and polyandry work, more power to them. If people need to put on costumes or use whips and chains, and everyone involved is ok with it, then God bless. I /try/ to live by the theory of "Do what you like, but harm none."

That being said, sometimes we need to do things that are arguably harmful to a few to protect the majority. We put killers in jail to protect the rest of society from them. And I think chemical castration of pedophiles is less harmful than letting them molest children.

I've worked with children who were abused in that manner, some by family members. The children had no choice in the matter. Their abusers felt a desire and chose to act on it. So yeah, I have no trouble with the thought of them being chemically castrated to protect future children.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

]Your post is one of the more thought provoking things I have read in a while. I consider myself a practicing Buddhist, believing pacifism and dialog the best road to peace. I'm far from perfect, so I am prone to bursts of anger and even hate just as much as anyone else (my OP shows as much, lol) but I always try to avoid ever really thinking along the lines your comment suggest, no matter the case.

That said, your post does make me think. Having been personally affected by a paedophile I have more bias than most and a solution to the problem of harm coming to children is something we all want. It makes me wonder if there is ever a time preemptive force is just. I'd like to say no and forget all about it, but it's tempting not to. It would feel cheap to cast aside all my beliefs for a solution to one problem. In a way I feel guilty for not instantly casting aside the thought.

Sorry if this comment seems jumbled or difficult to understand. I'm having trouble workding my exact thoughts.

I can't believe how much dislike my comment has garnered. While I myself haven't been a victim of pedophilia, I have spent time with children who were victims, and I have to admit that colors my view.

The fact of the matter is that it is nice to say "everything is acceptable" and we shouldn't demonize people who are different than us, but somewhere a line has to be drawn.

"No other fetish or sexual desire gets as much hate as pedophilia." says Matthew94. Well, as you replied, it's not a fetish, and it's not an OK desire. Sometimes when someone cuts me off while I'm driving I'd LOVE to smash into the back of their car. They had it coming, right? Wrong. Just because I have the desire to do it doesn't make it ok.

Somewhere we have to draw the line. Somewhere we have to say "No, that is not allowed." For me, pedophilia is that line. Also at that line are zoophilia and necrophilia.

I'm totally fine with any other sexual desire and fetish out there. Two grown men who are in love want to express it physically, go right ahead. Same with two women. Hell, if people can make polygamy and polyandry work, more power to them. If people need to put on costumes or use whips and chains, and everyone involved is ok with it, then God bless. I /try/ to live by the theory of "Do what you like, but harm none."

That being said, sometimes we need to do things that are arguably harmful to a few to protect the majority. We put killers in jail to protect the rest of society from them. And I think chemical castration of pedophiles is less harmful than letting them molest children.

I've worked with children who were abused in that manner, some by family members. The children had no choice in the matter. Their abusers felt a desire and chose to act on it. So yeah, I have no trouble with the thought of them being chemically castrated to protect future children.

You clearly feel strongly about this (as do I) but I would urge you to consider what you are suggesting. You are asking for us to take individuals who have committed no crime, who have harmed no one, and to force upon them something I would guess very, very few in the world would want for themselves. These people aren't criminals like the murderers we lock away to keep ourselves safe. They are, in my eyes, quite sick and repugnant, but not a criminal.

Can you prove these people will ever actually commit a crime? Of course paedophiles are demonized-every paedophile we hear about, we hear of because they have committed a crime. But what about those who go their entire life hiding their feelings? Who can say just how many they number? What percentage they make up of those afflicted with the disorder? It's easy to think all paedophiles watch child pornography (something hideously destructive and harmful to a child in ways few of us will ever understand) and go on to molest children, or even rape them, but do we know? No.

If we can force upon innocent men and women a fate they do not choose for thoughts in their head and actions they have never committed, what's next? If we decide we have that power and those rights, who else can be punished for crimes they have no intention of ever committing, for possible future actions we cannot say they will ever actually fulfill? Remember, if you decide we as a people have this right to protect our futures from harm, so can others. What of the man who says homosexuals cause harm to people? Remember: homosexuals are largely responsible for the spread of AIDS--that's not hatred from me and that's not conjecture. Can they then have homosexuals forced into therapy and given drugs to quieten their urges? No? Because you don't feel that homosexuals harm anyone? A question of moral authority arises and no one can ever come out on top in that situation.

I think your solution is a short-sighted one. A solution that creates as many problems as it solves. Although the problems created may seem to be not our own--and they may well not be--they are still problems and I don't think causing distress, anger, pain, humiliation or whatever else is just, no matter the cause.

Again: part of me would love to see the day paedophilia is made a death penalty offense. But I know that is wrong.

A solution that favours us a all should be our goal.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Many most likely keep their desires relegated to porn so they think why risk so much for what they feel is a small gain.

Another thing: I strongly suggest you do not ever again word a comment in a way that suggests it's passable or in any way okay to watch child pornography. Being filmed in such a way has profound and devastating impact on children and should never, in any situation, be made light of or go unstressed.

We are not talking about innocent little tapes here. You are referring to the graphic recording of a child being molested and/or raped. I know all too well how horrendous and painful the latter can be and for anyone to view or derive pleasure from either cannot and must not ever be accepted or endorsed.

Consider your words carefully.

 

[Vault101]

Many most likely keep their desires relegated to porn so they think why risk so much for what they feel is a small gain.

Another thing: I strongly suggest you do not ever again word a comment in a way that suggests it's passable or in any way okay to watch child pornography. Being filmed in such a way has profound and devastating impact on children and should never, in any situation, be made light of or go unstressed.

We are not talking about innocent little tapes here. You are referring to the graphic recording of a child being molested and/or raped. I know all too well how horrendous and painful the latter can be and for anyone to view or derive pleasure from either cannot and must not ever be accepted or endorsed.

Consider your words carefully.

what about "drawn" stuff? like loli henti ...perhaps thats what he ment

because yeah, physical childporn..made and veiwed under those circumstances isnt ok

 

[renegade7]

Homosexuality does have real victims who are harmed by their activities.

Religious people. Their egos are irreparably damaged by the knowledge that somewhere, someone is doing something their god said is wrong.

 

[Syzygy23]

What you said: But you know what? I don't care. Shut up. You're wrong, you're a bigot and you harm people in ways some never recover from.

What the anti-homosexuals think about what you said: But you know what? I don't care. Shut up. You're wrong, you're a bigot and you harm people in ways some never recover from.

This is entirely the WRONG way to win any sort of debate or fight against people who would see homosexuality oppressed. Back up your reasoning with a hearty dose of either reality or universally agreed upon facts, instead of emotional outbursts.

If anyone tries to play the "But God says it's a sin!" card against you, remind them that it also commands us to put to death children who curse at their parents (Leviticus 20:9), women who have premarital sex (Deuteronomy 22:13-21), and those who worship different gods (Deuteronomy 13:6-10).

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Many most likely keep their desires relegated to porn so they think why risk so much for what they feel is a small gain.

Another thing: I strongly suggest you do not ever again word a comment in a way that suggests it's passable or in any way okay to watch child pornography. Being filmed in such a way has profound and devastating impact on children and should never, in any situation, be made light of or go unstressed.

We are not talking about innocent little tapes here. You are referring to the graphic recording of a child being molested and/or raped. I know all too well how horrendous and painful the latter can be and for anyone to view or derive pleasure from either cannot and must not ever be accepted or endorsed.

Consider your words carefully.

what about "drawn" stuff? like loli henti ...perhaps thats what he ment

because yeah, physical childporn..made and veiwed under those circumstances isnt ok

I really don't want to talk about it further, but yes, drawings of children who aren't real have no victims. It is illegal in many countries, but I wouldn't oppose its existence.