• Is Pedophilia a Mental Illness/Disorder?
    240 replies, posted
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;32661117]I'm sure you don't talk to people about their Paraphilias too often but sometimes people who do not have a consenting partner to act out their sexual fantasies may go out to solicit prostitutes or practice their fantasies on unwilling victims. Buying prostitutes and forcing fantasies on unwilling partners is UNHEALTHY. These individuals do sometimes participate in frequent and unprotected sex which could cause the spread of disease which is UNHEALTHY. Sometimes these individuals also choose to take a job that gets them closer to their fetish as well[/quote] "practice their fantasies on unwilling victims" "forcing fantasies on unwilling partners" What in god's name? Are you even reading my posts? I never mentioned anything like that. Both of those are rape and completely unrelated to anything I mentioned. Do you seriously not understand the difference between consensual activities between adults and non-consensual ones? [QUOTE=InvaderNouga;32661117]Often times there's impairment in the ability to have meaningful affectionate sex(which is also a Disorder) as a direct cause of these Paraphilias which is UNHEALTHY. These disorders do sometimes (more often then not) cause social dysfunction in people as a result of their behavior, social dysfunction is UNHEALTHY. Some individuals feel shame, guilt, and depression about their sexual behavior because it is considered socially unacceptable. Depression is UNHEALTHY. Usually during bouts of these Depressive episodes they are accompanied by a surge in frequency and intensity of their Paraphilic behavior which makes their problem that much worse. That is also UNHEALTHY. You just gotta look at the big picture mannnnnnn.[/QUOTE] You're not presenting a big picture whatsoever. You're taking viewpoints that differ from yours and labelling them unhealthy. This is a problem, and it's completely unbecoming of a proper debate. Oh and FYI, since this was something you mentioned and it's relevant to me personally: [release]In 1994, the American Psychiatric Association responded by modifying the denotative criteria defining “sadism” and “masochism” in the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM IV); thus, consensual sadomasochistic behavior no longer is considered a sexual disorder. Furthermore, in the textual revision of the DSM-IV TR (2000), sadomasochistic behavior is a sexual and mental disorder if the patient “has acted on these urges with a non-consenting person” and if “the urges, sexual fantasies, or behaviors cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty”. Elsewhere, in 1995, Denmark became the first country to delete “sadomasochism” from its medical disorders system of classification.[/release] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadism_and_masochism_as_medical_terms#Contemporary_perspective]Via Wikipedia[/url]
Non-consensual sex being bad isn't paedophilia-specific.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32660275]Is that your final answer? Also, the efficiency of sex means jack shit.[/QUOTE] It is, zookia. Never said it wasn't. And yes, zeke, it is. it's not the pain itself, it's whatever reaction the brain has to the pain (like in the form of the pain-induced high like i mentioned before), or whatever mental conditioning you have that makes you think pain is desirable, therefore deriving pleasure from the knowledge that you're in pain. And how does it mean jack-shit? Sex is an action like any other, it can be given a quantity of quality like any other action (which is why you can identify some actions as more desirable than others).
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;32669863]And how does it mean jack-shit? Sex is an action like any other, it can be given a quantity of quality like any other action (which is why you can identify some actions as more desirable than others).[/QUOTE] You said inefficient sex is unhealthy, which basically implies that any sex that isn't sufficiently efficient (however you intend on measuring that) is unhealthy. I don't think you really mean to measure the efficiency of sex in arms-lost-per-session, so why don't you explain yourself instead of complaining that you aren't immediately understood?
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;32669863] And yes, zeke, it is. it's not the pain itself, it's whatever reaction the brain has to the pain (like in the form of the pain-induced high like i mentioned before), or whatever mental conditioning you have that makes you think pain is desirable, therefore deriving pleasure from the knowledge that you're in pain.[/quote] "It is because it is". Explain WHY you feel this way instead of just posting cir [QUOTE=MountainWatcher;32669863]And how does it mean jack-shit? Sex is an action like any other, it can be given a quantity of quality like any other action (which is why you can identify some actions as more desirable than others).[/QUOTE] If you think the quality of sex is measured by how efficient it is, I doubt you've had sex. How good sex is can't be explained by textbooks, you need to actually do it to know what you're on about.
[QUOTE=Thy Reaper;32670341]You said inefficient sex is unhealthy, which basically implies that any sex that isn't sufficiently efficient (however you intend on measuring that) is unhealthy. I don't think you really mean to measure the efficiency of sex in arms-lost-per-session, so why don't you explain yourself instead of complaining that you aren't immediately understood?[/QUOTE] An unhealthy behavior would be a behavior that would cause a negative net impact. Sexual pleasure - unhappiness caused by loss of arm/cigarrette burn/nipple-twisting/torn-pre-pubescent vaginas. Zeke, The "it is " part referred to your "is it the final answer" question, I apologize f I sounded too full of myself. Well, I can argument that pain is the opposite of pleasure which causes happiness therefore, the opposite of pleasure must cause unhappiness (which can't cause happiness on its own) because there can't be any other thing here besides pain and pleasure and unhappiness exists. (Although you could just say that what causes (un/)happiness isn't just pain or pleasure. Honestly, I can't really prove this, it seems obvious, as the fundamental laws of logic do. And zeke, efficiency of sex is just net quality of consequences of sex. And it IS quantifiable, you've been doing it for all your life. As soon as you decide masturbating is better than shoving your dick in a dish washer you've been deciding one has more good than the other, and "more than" implies numbers. What is VERY difficult is finding a standard unit.
How is sexual pleasure from rape unhealthy? It's pleasure. [editline]8th October 2011[/editline] Actually, you know what, this is getting off topic. Back to talking about pedophilia.
pedophlia is just a fetish as far as i'm concerned but when it manifests itself as child molestation it is now a control disorder and needs to be addressed immediately it's okay to find anything sexually attractive, as long as you are not harming anyone/doing something illegal in the process
[QUOTE=child birth;32674120]pedophlia is just a fetish as far as i'm concerned[/QUOTE] Pedophilia is no more a fetish than homosexuality.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32674242]Pedophilia is no more a fetish than homosexuality.[/QUOTE] ??????? liking an age group and a gender are completely different concepts "finding old people hot is no more a fetish than homosexuality"
[QUOTE=child birth;32674262]??????? liking an age group and a gender are completely different concepts "finding old people hot is no more a fetish than homosexuality"[/QUOTE] You seem to be confusing gender with biological sex.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32674319]You seem to be confusing gender with biological sex.[/QUOTE] being a male and being in a relationship with a girl who is male sexed, but referring to your relationship as gay, is really erasive and not chill at all. either way, your connection between pedophilia and homosexuality still makes no sense.
[QUOTE=child birth;32674370]being a male and being in a relationship with a girl who is male sexed, but referring to your relationship as gay, is really erasive and not chill at all. either way, your connection between pedophilia and homosexuality still makes no sense.[/QUOTE] Erasive, what does that mean? I can't seem to find it in any dictionary. And a "girl who is male sexed"? Do you just mean an effeminate male? That's hardly what I'd call a "girl" in any definition.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32674401]Erasive, what does that mean? I can't seem to find it in any dictionary. And a "girl who is male sexed"? Do you just mean an effeminate male? That's hardly what I'd call a "girl" in any definition.[/QUOTE] someone who is female gendered, but male sexed, is referred to by female pronouns. something that is "erasive" is something that discards someone's personal identity, and replaces it with something else, which aint cool at all.
[QUOTE=Jookia;32673485]How is sexual pleasure from rape unhealthy? It's pleasure. [editline]8th October 2011[/editline] Actually, you know what, this is getting off topic. Back to talking about pedophilia.[/QUOTE] It isn't. The action is. At the end of it, you've get a sexually satisfied person and a physically and mentally wrecked person. The second greatly outweighs the first in consequences.
It's a fetish like any other... just a lot more socially questionable. I don't think we should brand paedophiles as monsters, but rather try to help them get over it.
[QUOTE=Scotchair;32674797]It's a fetish like any other... just a lot more socially questionable. I don't think we should brand paedophiles as monsters, but rather try to help them get over it.[/QUOTE] you can't really get someone over a fetish without emotionally scarring them about the subject
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;32673139] Zeke, The "it is " part referred to your "is it the final answer" question, I apologize f I sounded too full of myself. Well, I can argument that pain is the opposite of pleasure which causes happiness therefore, the opposite of pleasure must cause unhappiness (which can't cause happiness on its own) because there can't be any other thing here besides pain and pleasure and unhappiness exists. (Although you could just say that what causes (un/)happiness isn't just pain or pleasure. Honestly, I can't really prove this, it seems obvious, as the fundamental laws of logic do.[/quote] Pleasure = good Pain = bad Isn't part of the fundamental laws of logic, it's just what the opinion of most humans is. Doesn't mean it's totally correct and should be the be-all and end-all of what's proper. And deviation from it most certainly should not be reason to label someone "unhealthy". But as soon as a person starts labelling differing opinions "unhealthy" they're too far gone to listen to reason because they'll just pass off their opponent as being unhealthy and not worth listening to. I believe this is what you're doing right now. Correct me if I'm wrong. [QUOTE=MountainWatcher;32673139]And zeke, efficiency of sex is just net quality of consequences of sex. And it IS quantifiable, you've been doing it for all your life. As soon as you decide masturbating is better than shoving your dick in a dish washer you've been deciding one has more good than the other, and "more than" implies numbers. What is VERY difficult is finding a standard unit.[/QUOTE] "Good" isn't something that can be quantified. "More good" is relevant to good. It doesn't involve numbers whatsoever. We're humans, not computers.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32675044]Pleasure = good Pain = bad Isn't part of the fundamental laws of logic, it's just what the opinion of most humans is. Doesn't mean it's totally correct and should be the be-all and end-all of what's proper. And deviation from it most certainly should not be reason to label someone "unhealthy". But as soon as a person starts labelling differing opinions "unhealthy" they're too far gone to listen to reason because they'll just pass off their opponent as being unhealthy and not worth listening to. I believe this is what you're doing right now. Correct me if I'm wrong. "Good" isn't something that can be quantified. "More good" is relevant to good. It doesn't involve numbers whatsoever. We're humans, not computers.[/QUOTE] I will. The unhealthiness you refer to would affect your sexual desires not your cognitive abilities. You are just as good a source as anyone else. And I didn't say it was, I said it had the same nature in regards to being proven. You can't prove the fundamental laws of logic,they're fundamental, you simply know they are. Same with pleasure/pain. They are, hell, I can't find a good way to put it, good and bad by emotional definition. I have a different argument. First off, good and bad are measurements of worth. Worth can only be exist in a consciousness, so things by themselves can't have worth. Secondly, I can split the range of conscious "actions" into thought and emotion. Thought can be thought of as both sensory information as well as logical information (shit you derive yourself) but I can easily argue that all of this is merely things. An image of a rose is just a rose but instead of being located in the world, it's located in your mind. And I've said before that things couldn't be given worth, so knowledge and thought can't be given worth either (I'll admit this part is a bit shaky) which leaves emotion. Thirdly, I can also deconstruct any and all emotion into happiness and unhappiness regarding different aspects of life (envy would be unhappiness regarding others having what we want, etc.), which leaves us with only 2 things to work with: Happiness and Unhappiness. One is given positive worth (good) and the other negative worth (bad). And envy, for an example is an emotion you attempt to delete, by definition, you want what the other has, so you want to delete the envy, which is an unhappy emotion. Which means all consciousnesses place negative worth on unhappiness and positive worth on happiness. And "more speed" is relevant to speed, but you still are able to quantify it. It is impossible to speak of more than without speaking of quantities since "more than" is, simply put, " in more quantity than".
The fuck are you babbling on about?
MountainWatcher are you an objectivist? Most of your post was babble but all I could gather was that you're an objectivist. And by the way, speed is different from pleasure because speed is quantifiable, pleasure is not. There are units we can use to measure speed (they're arbitrary but that's not relevant right now), we don't have that for how good or nice something is.
[QUOTE=child birth;32674418]someone who is female gendered, but male sexed, is referred to by female pronouns. something that is "erasive" is something that discards someone's personal identity, and replaces it with something else, which aint cool at all.[/QUOTE] Are you referring to transgender individuals? Because that's what it sounds like
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32676355]Are you referring to transgender individuals? Because that's what it sounds like[/QUOTE] ding ding ding
[QUOTE=child birth;32676451]ding ding ding[/QUOTE] So you're saying that transgender people "aint cool at all"?
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32676523]So you're saying that transgender people "aint cool at all"?[/QUOTE] hahahahha oh my god i'm saying that referring to a trans-female as a male by saying that the relation they are in with a man is homosexual is erasive of their identity, which isnt cool. buff up on yo reading comprehension
[QUOTE=child birth;32676542]hahahahha oh my god i'm saying that referring to a trans-female as a male by saying that the relation they are in with a man is homosexual is erasive of their identity, which isnt cool. buff up on yo reading comprehension[/QUOTE] We should call transsexual and transgender people by the pronoun that they want us to call them by
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32676547]We should call transsexual and transgender people by the pronoun that they want us to call them by[/QUOTE] yes that is what i'm saying maybe i worded it badly but i'll just repeat myself if a man is in love with a woman, who is transgendered, the relationship is not homosexual. calling it homosexual is labelling the trans-woman as a male.
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;32674542]It isn't. The action is. At the end of it, you've get a sexually satisfied person and a physically and mentally wrecked person. The second greatly outweighs the first in consequences.[/QUOTE] So your argument is that rape is wrong and pedophilia is okay? Like we're all saying?
[QUOTE=child birth;32676557]yes that is what i'm saying maybe i worded it badly but i'll just repeat myself if a man is in love with a woman, who is transgendered, the relationship is not homosexual. calling it homosexual is labelling the trans-woman as a male.[/QUOTE] Well then I certainly agree, trans individuals deserve to be called by the proper pronouns, and calling a relationship between a MtF person and a man homosexual is wrong.
Stop derailing. This is about pedophilia.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.