Pedophilia is a fetish, not a mental disorder. Also, as long as they don't perpetuate porn that harms ACTUAL children (not counting drawn) or rape children, there's nothing wrong with them.
[QUOTE=Mr. Smartass;32898936]Pedophilia is a fetish, not a mental disorder. Also, as long as they don't perpetuate porn that harms ACTUAL children (not counting drawn) or rape children, there's nothing wrong with them.[/QUOTE]
It's not a fetish, look it up.
imo our society's views on what's right and what's wrong is subject to variation when compared to others
[editline]21st October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mr. Smartass;32898936]Pedophilia is a fetish, not a mental disorder. Also, as long as they don't perpetuate porn that harms ACTUAL children (not counting drawn) or rape children, there's nothing wrong with them.[/QUOTE]
even though i don't trust the American Psychiatric Association very much, they do classify it as a mental health issue
[QUOTE=Mon;32899730]
even though i don't trust the American Psychiatric Association very much, they do classify it as a mental health issue[/QUOTE]
Just because a government agency classifies something as something else doesn't make it that way.
[QUOTE=Mr. Smartass;32900299]Just because a government agency classifies something as something else doesn't make it that way.[/QUOTE]
can you back up why it's a fetish and why a reputed government health organisation is wrong or are you just saying this
[QUOTE=CheeseMan;32900331]can you back up why it's a fetish and why a reputed government health organisation is wrong or are you just saying this[/QUOTE]
par·a·phil·i·a/ˌparəˈfilēə/
Noun:
A condition characterized by abnormal sexual desires, typically involving extreme or dangerous activities.
I misspoke, I meant paraphilia- as most things typically associated with the word "fetish" actually are.
ACTING on these urges is different- to hurt a child in that way is definitely a mental illness, but having the sexual attraction to children is not.
[QUOTE=Mr. Smartass;32900425]par·a·phil·i·a/ˌparəˈfilēə/
Noun:
A condition characterized by abnormal sexual desires, typically involving extreme or dangerous activities.
I misspoke, I meant paraphilia- as most things typically associated with the word "fetish" actually are.
ACTING on these urges is different- to hurt a child in that way is definitely a mental illness, but having the sexual attraction to children is not.[/QUOTE]
The definition doesn't disprove it's a mental illness. I mean, I don't agree that it is either, but if the quacks say it is, that's pretty much the final word on the matter.
[QUOTE=Grim Joker;32900503]The definition doesn't disprove it's a mental illness. I mean, I don't agree that it is either, but if the quacks say it is, that's pretty much the final word on the matter.[/QUOTE]
Well, the government says that weed should be illegal but there's still quite a large discussion on it.
[QUOTE=Mr. Smartass;32900575]Well, the government says that weed should be illegal but there's still quite a large discussion on it.[/QUOTE]
But that doesn't change the fact that it's illegal. That's my point. The standing of Pedophilia in the way of Mental Illness may change in the future, and there is debate for it, but for now it's officially a mental illness, apparently.
[QUOTE=Crimor;32843586]Paedophilia is the fetish, raping is the act, and the act could be fueled by any fetish.[/QUOTE]
Except this "fetish" in particular can only be fulfilled by rape, since children cannot recieve sex positively, and if there's no rape but only wanking to sexual depiction of children, that's another thing.
[sp]Another thing called lolis that ALSO shouldn't exist.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Scarabix;32940032]Except this "fetish" in particular can only be fulfilled by rape, since children cannot recieve sex positively, and if there's no rape but only wanking to sexual depiction of children, that's another thing.
[sp]Another thing called lolis that ALSO shouldn't exist.[/sp][/QUOTE]
How many times does this need to be said? [I]It's not a fetish[/I].
snip
Personally, I think rather than setting a number as age of consent (whether it's 14 or 18 or whatever) it should be a person to person thing. Some people can be 30 years old and not mentally mature enough to have responsible sexual relationships, I myself was mature enough when I was 13 but waited until I was 17. If somebody is under a certain age, give them a simple examination to see if they are mentally developed enough to have a sexual relationship.
Or maybe a combination, where you either have to be above a certain age and pass the 'mental developement test' (old enough so you can have sexual relationships without being injured) but allow everyone to engage in sexual activity once they are of 'legally independant' age regardless of if they pass the test.
All pedophiles need to be executed Russian style in a dark cell.
I think it depends what you define as pedophilia here.
I think attraction to girls as young as 13-14 etc, while today it is considered wrong, it would have been perfectly natural from a neanderthal / animal perspective, it is around then they become ready to bear children, so it would be understandable then for males to be attracted to them.
I think you could consider it an illness overall by the definition of the word. It is well outside of social norms, and an illness is only what it is if we decide so.
[QUOTE=KlemensTri2;33023302]All pedophiles need to be executed Russian style in a dark cell.[/QUOTE]
I know you're a troll but...
Give me a justification/argument for that.
[QUOTE=Jo The Shmo;32646242]It's not a mental disorder to have the fetish, but people who act on those fetishes probably have some mental disorder, hence the lack of self control[/QUOTE]
I agree with this statement, it was worded well.
[QUOTE=Painties Hose;33020132]Personally, I think rather than setting a number as age of consent (whether it's 14 or 18 or whatever) it should be a person to person thing. Some people can be 30 years old and not mentally mature enough to have responsible sexual relationships, I myself was mature enough when I was 13 but waited until I was 17. If somebody is under a certain age, give them a simple examination to see if they are mentally developed enough to have a sexual relationship.
Or maybe a combination, where you either have to be above a certain age and pass the 'mental developement test' (old enough so you can have sexual relationships without being injured) but allow everyone to engage in sexual activity once they are of 'legally independant' age regardless of if they pass the test.[/QUOTE]
It really is up to the persons involved, but I think it more of an issue about the families of the people.
[QUOTE=Lilolia;33023387]I think it depends what you define as pedophilia here.
I think attraction to girls as young as 13-14 etc, while today it is considered wrong, it would have been [B]perfectly natural from a neanderthal / animal perspective[/B], it is around then they become ready to bear children, so it would be understandable then for males to be attracted to them.
I think you could consider it an illness overall by the definition of the word. It is well outside of social norms, and an illness is only what it is if we decide so.[/QUOTE]
Go a couple of hundred of years back and it was normal, hell, students and teachers in greece were normally sleeping together.
[QUOTE=Crimor;33051670]Go a couple of hundred of years back and it was normal, hell, students and teachers in greece were normally sleeping together.[/QUOTE]
If it's an attraction to 13-14 year olds, it isn't pedophilia anyways. That would be hebephilia.
Pedophilia is strictly an attraction to [B]prepubescent[/B] children. (I.e. less than ~12)
[I]Nepiophilia[/I], attraction to babies, infants (0 to 4ish)
[I]Pedophilia[/I], attraction to prepubsecent children (4ish to 12ish)
[I]Hebephilia[/I], attraction to people in early puberty (12 to 15ish)
[I]Ephebophilia[/I], attraction to adolescent young adults (15 to 19ish)
[url]http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Nepiophilia[/url]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia[/url]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebephilia[/url]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephebophilia[/url]
I think the reason why it's a good idea to differentiate is that there may be huge differences in numbers here. Nobody really knows how many of each there are, but I'm willing to bet that ephebophilia is very normal, maybe even hebephilia too.
And then there's [I]teleiophilia,[/I] I don't even know why that has a word, as it isn't a paraphilia. [I](Since the whole idea of a paraphilia is that it's a [b]deviant[/b] sexual orientation. And teleiophilia is obviously neither abnormal nor deviant, so...)[/I]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronophilia[/url]
I know that, but the mass media has pretty much done the same to the word pedophilia that they've done to the word skinhead, skinheads aren't racist, some people that happen to be skinheads are racist. And with pedophilia, the media has made it work with 0-17 year olds, which is why I can't be assed to explain that to people like I do with skinheads(Used to fucking explaining that every time I apply for work), and I'd bet most people here didn't know anything about what you said.
Indeed they don't, but having a discussion about a term and using the meaning as the media has made it makes no sense.
The meaning that the media and the general puplic has given to the word "pedophilia" is simply wrong. Discussing whether or not it is a mental disorder or illness [I]requires[/I] the use of the real meaning.
But to be honest, I'd much rather all -philias be replaced with -sexuality's. Putting philia at the end only changes one thing; that it is deviant [I](not normal)[/I]. That a sexuality is not normal isn't very relevant, so in the end all it serves is to cause baseless negative connotations. Not only that, but the word makes no sense. "Philia" means love of, which has nothing to do with the meaning of paraphilias.
-sexuality is just way more straight forward and to the point. Calling pedophilia "pedosexuality" would just be way more clear.
People would argue that doing so is an attempt to make it seem like a normal and acceptable thing. But no, to me the reason is to get rid of baseless assumptions [I](all pedophiles are child molesters, mentally ill, uncontrollable, insane)[/I], and to get a focus on what is actually relevant. It is the sexual preference for children.
Indeed the media has destroyed the meaning completely, which is exactly why my post is important and should be brought up in discussions like this. We can't just go "oh, the media made everyone think like this... I guess it is like that, then."
Also, I wasn't really addressing you specifically, maybe I should have quoted the post you quoted instead. Sorry 'bout that.
this is a hard question to answer. i would have to say yes. mostly because lots of pedos have reallly fucked up problems as if they were raped themselves when children thus they want to reverse the rolls or they cant get a woman so they want a rape victem that isnt as strong as them, most pedos i belive are sick in the mind but if someone was to be aressted for molesting a small boy or girl they sholdnt let him off easy for being "special" mental illness or not its a terrible fucked up crime that can lead to death of the victom or mental scaring which could when the victom grows up wants to reverse the rolls and molest a child the perpertrator when areested i belive should spend the rest of their life in jail or get the damn elctric chair for their crime on the innosence of a child if you dont agree with thats fine but please respect my opinion
[QUOTE]lots of pedos have reallly fucked up problems as if they were raped themselves when children thus they want to reverse the rolls or they cant get a woman so they want a rape victem that isnt as strong as them,[/QUOTE]
You're talking about child molesters. Ask on a forum for pedophiles and most of them will say they found out about their sexuality around puberty or earlier. Just like any other people with their sexuality.
You're making the mistake of thinking that the "pedos" you have seen or heard about are the majority of pedophiles, or even a significant part of them. Those are the bad ones. Obviously you hear about those who get caught for comitting crimes; there's many pedophiles that never do anything wrong, but that you don't hear about because it's taboo.
Even assuming that you meant child molesters and not pedophiles, the idea that most of them have been molested themselves is also flawed in itself.
[I]"In North America, for example, approximately 15% to 25% of women and 5% to 15% of men were sexually abused when they were children."[/I]
So, mostly females are victims of child molestation, yet almost all child molesters are male.
[I]"The experience of sexual abuse as a child was previously thought to be a strong risk factor, but research does not show a causal relationship, as the vast majority of sexually abused children do not grow up to be adult offenders, nor do the majority of adult offenders report childhood sexual abuse."[/I]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse#Offenders[/url]
[quote]if someone was to be aressted for molesting a small boy or girl they sholdnt let him off easy for being "special" mental illness[/quote]
Nobody is saying anything like that. What you may have heard is people discussing whether to use rehabilitation and therapy instead, or combined with jail time.
[QUOTE]if you dont agree with thats fine but please respect my opinion[/QUOTE]
Sure, I disagree with the opinion you presented and I respect your opinion, but there's some flaws in your post that doesn't have to do with opinions but just misinformation. Also spelling.
I feel its the same as Homosexuality. In my opinion you do not choose to become gay, its just ( not quite sure if this is the correct term to use ) genetical. Naturally some people may be attracted to the same sex as them, and naturally people may be attracted to children. Not saying I agree with pedophilia, but I don't think you choose to be one.
[QUOTE=Scott_Smith;33143239]I feel its the same as Homosexuality. In my opinion you do not choose to become gay, its just ( not quite sure if this is the correct term to use ) genetical. Naturally some people may be attracted to the same sex as them, and naturally people may be attracted to children. Not saying I agree with pedophilia, but I don't think you choose to be one.[/QUOTE]
This is a good way to think about it. You don't choose what or who you're attracted to. It's just your genetics, a chemical reaction in your body. It's not their fault that they are into kids.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;33143053]You're talking about child molesters. Ask on a forum for pedophiles and most of them will say they found out about their sexuality around puberty or earlier. Just like any other people with their sexuality.
You're making the mistake of thinking that the "pedos" you have seen or heard about are the majority of pedophiles, or even a significant part of them. Those are the bad ones. Obviously you hear about those who get caught for comitting crimes; there's many pedophiles that never do anything wrong, but that you don't hear about because it's taboo.
Even assuming that you meant child molesters and not pedophiles, the idea that most of them have been molested themselves is also flawed in itself.
[I]"In North America, for example, approximately 15% to 25% of women and 5% to 15% of men were sexually abused when they were children."[/I]
So, mostly females are victims of child molestation, yet almost all child molesters are male.
[I]"The experience of sexual abuse as a child was previously thought to be a strong risk factor, but research does not show a causal relationship, as the vast majority of sexually abused children do not grow up to be adult offenders, nor do the majority of adult offenders report childhood sexual abuse."[/I]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse#Offenders[/url]
Nobody is saying anything like that. What you may have heard is people discussing whether to use rehabilitation and therapy instead, or combined with jail time.
Sure, I disagree with the opinion you presented and I respect your opinion, but there's some flaws in your post that doesn't have to do with opinions but just misinformation. Also spelling.[/QUOTE]i agree with what you are saying and also thanks for setting me straight about what i was wrong with now i understand.
[QUOTE=Scarabix;32940032]Except this "fetish" in particular can only be fulfilled by rape, since children cannot recieve sex positively, and if there's no rape but only wanking to sexual depiction of children, that's another thing.
[sp]Another thing called lolis that ALSO shouldn't exist.[/sp][/QUOTE]
But people with fetishes for dead people don't need to rape a corpse to get sexual gratification, he/she can also look at real or[B][I][U] DRAWN[/U][/I][/B] porn of it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.