• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Paedophila

Druidus

Keeper of the Grove
What, exactly, is the moral issue with paedophilia? Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's right to molest children, or take pictures of them for purposes of selling, but what, in essence, makes it wrong?

Secondly, imagine a child takes secret pictures of themselves, and hides them. When the child grows up, and finds them, the child decides to try to sell them. Is there something intrinsically wrong with this? Yes, as a child the person may have been unable to make such a decision, but he/she did make the choice on her own as a child to take the pictures, and now, as an adult, is making the choice to sell them. I honestly can't find anything wrong with this, because if she sold them, she might help a paedophilic person keep away from real children.

Thirdly, I know that many fantasies of male children of age of puberty focus on older women. I know this, because four, and even five years ago, I had such fantasies. Because I wanted this, and it was like a dream, why would it be wrong for someone to grant it to me? For this issue, my answer is much more clouded. The moral implications are great. Was I, as a child, capable of making such a decision? However, I am not definitively swayed in either direction. I don't want this to be an argument over whether in practice it would be possible or not to know if a child granted consent/actively pursued sex with an older person, but if presented with the opportunity, can any child make the choice?
 

anami

Member
Druidus said:
What, exactly, is the moral issue with paedophilia? Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's right to molest children, or take pictures of them for purposes of selling, but what, in essence, makes it wrong?

The moral issue is the same, i think, as in the thread regarding personal freedoms and where they end.
Your personal freedoms end when they start infringing on another person's personal freedoms.
So if someone is looking at photographs of children, the logic could easily lead you to concider that a child may have been tormented and traumatized to get them. So taking action on someones reality at a very susceptible age causing them to have to endure hard lessons. Giving them issues.
This is bad. m'kay?
!!!!
 

Dinogrrl

peeb!
I think it's wrong because it skews the child's perception of sex and relationships. Even young children who may want that, or think they want it...I mean...I dunno about you, but I look back on some of my childhood dreams and wishes and they were totally off-the-wall. If I had been granted them...bwah I'd be so messed up now x_X.

Not to mention that I can't have a pet gryphon to begin with >:{.
 
M

Majikthise

Guest
Druidus said:
What, exactly, is the moral issue with paedophilia? Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's right to molest children, or take pictures of them for purposes of selling, but what, in essence, makes it wrong?

I am speechless.

Secondly, imagine a child takes secret pictures of themselves, and hides them. When the child grows up, and finds them, the child decides to try to sell them. Is there something intrinsically wrong with this? Yes, as a child the person may have been unable to make such a decision, but he/she did make the choice on her own as a child to take the pictures, and now, as an adult, is making the choice to sell them. I honestly can't find anything wrong with this, because if she sold them, she might help a paedophilic person keep away from real children.

This is BS with a capital B. Photos will not satiate a child molester.

Thirdly, I know that many fantasies of male children of age of puberty focus on older women. I know this, because four, and even five years ago, I had such fantasies. Because I wanted this, and it was like a dream, why would it be wrong for someone to grant it to me? For this issue, my answer is much more clouded. The moral implications are great. Was I, as a child, capable of making such a decision? However, I am not definitively swayed in either direction. I don't want this to be an argument over whether in practice it would be possible or not to know if a child granted consent/actively pursued sex with an older person, but if presented with the opportunity, can any child make the choice?
Simply put ,no.It takes a lot, really a lot to offend me.You have managed to do it quite well.This does not simply cheese people off, this is offensive.I will be ignoring this thread now.Good day.
 

Druidus

Keeper of the Grove
Majikthise, I am only 16, and underexperienced in the world. I made this thread to see what you think. Can you tell me why it would be wrong for the hypothetical person to sell pictures of herself?

I really don't understand that.

What I do believe, however, is that on the whole, paedophilia is wrong. What I have trouble with, is how to stop it, and to what extent. In considering the details, I tend to miss the whole.

Don't take offense to anything I post. Much of it is probably random babblings. :bonk:

I think part of the problem here is that you thought I was challenging the wrongness of paedophilia. This is not the case. I am looking for what makes it wrong, in it's essence. Is it the inability to give consent, or something else? :confused:

I think it's wrong because it skews the child's perception of sex and relationships. Even young children who may want that, or think they want it...I mean...I dunno about you, but I look back on some of my childhood dreams and wishes and they were totally off-the-wall. If I had been granted them...bwah I'd be so messed up now x_X.
I agree. Many of those early fantasies of mine were very unrealistic, and likely unhealthy if transferred to reality. I want to know what others think, especially those of opposing viewpoints.
 
Hi,

It's plainly wrong for the simple reason that children are sexually immature; for them sex is torture, no fun at all.

Recently, I read that Alfred Kinsey's data on child's sexuality were so skewed that if he did his 'research' today it would be laughed aside! He was very biased because he himself was gay & paedophiliac! His motivation for his 'revolutionary' conclusions about american sexuality was to justify his own behavior.
This is important for his books were accepted for years by the american people as 'scientific.' Yet now, women's groups are working to show that Kinsey was a fraud!

peace,
sonda
 

Druidus

Keeper of the Grove
Hi,

It's plainly wrong for the simple reason that children are sexually immature; for them sex is torture, no fun at all.
When is a child sexually mature? Can you truly set an age? Or does it depend on the individual? And why is it torture? Thank you for the response!

When I was about ten, I found a vibrating massager that I found *very* pleasure inducing. ;)

Recently, I read that Alfred Kinsey's data on child's sexuality were so skewed that if he did his 'research' today it would be laughed aside!
Who is this man? What is the data? Is there a link? Where is the information that disproves his theories/data.

He was very biased because he himself was gay & paedophiliac!
Was this proven? Do not slander people otherwise. And what is wrong with homosexuality?

Thank you for the replies so far! :jiggy:
 

Humble_servant

New Member
I agree that it's perfectly natural for young children to have these "fantasies". To take pictures and sell them,however, is enabling people and encouraging people to devalue the purity of our youth. The effects of this can be devestating to our future generations.
 

Littlefoot

New Member
What, exactly, is the moral issue with paedophilia? Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's right to molest children, or take pictures of them for purposes of selling, but what, in essence, makes it wrong?


Littlefoot: the same thing that makes anything else immoral, you're hurting someone.


Secondly, imagine a child takes secret pictures of themselves, and hides them. When the child grows up, and finds them, the child decides to try to sell them. Is there something intrinsically wrong with this?

Littlefoot: No, however...

Yes, as a child the person may have been unable to make such a decision, but he/she did make the choice on her own as a child to take the pictures, and now, as an adult, is making the choice to sell them. I honestly can't find anything wrong with this, because if she sold them, she might help a paedophilic person keep away from real children.

Littlefoot... the legality of such pictures would severly undermine efforts to prosecute the crimes that are the reason child pornography is illegal.. basically forcing a kid to strip naked for a camera and or perform sexual acts. its something so sick that it HAS to be stopped, the occasional hypothetical where there was no harm done to cause the even not withstanding.

Thirdly, I know that many fantasies of male children of age of puberty focus on older women. I know this, because four, and even five years ago, I had such fantasies. Because I wanted this, and it was like a dream, why would it be wrong for someone to grant it to me?

Littlefoot Because you're not ready to make that decision. Kids want to do drugs, drive fast, eat an entire boxfull of ice cream, eat all of their holloween candy on one night ETC. they're not allowed to because their judgement is so bad and THEY DON"T PAY ATTENTION TO THE CONSEQUENCES.


For this issue, my answer is much more clouded. The moral implications are great. Was I, as a child, capable of making such a decision? However, I am not definitively swayed in either direction. I don't want this to be an argument over whether in practice it would be possible or not to know if a child granted consent/actively pursued sex with an older person, but if presented with the opportunity, can any child make the choice?
 

Druidus

Keeper of the Grove
Littlefoot, you have answered my questions very clearly, I thank you.
Littlefoot: the same thing that makes anything else immoral, you're hurting someone.
Is prostitution immoral, if the prostitute is doing it of his/her own free will, without a pimp? I agree with your statement, however.

Littlefoot... the legality of such pictures would severly undermine efforts to prosecute the crimes that are the reason child pornography is illegal.. basically forcing a kid to strip naked for a camera and or perform sexual acts. its something so sick that it HAS to be stopped, the occasional hypothetical where there was no harm done to cause the even not withstanding.
This is a reason that I now believe my second question is more difficult to answer. On the one hand I value freedom to do what you want so long as you hurt no one. I value that a lot. On the other hand, indirectly, one may harm children by the release of the photos.

Littlefoot Because you're not ready to make that decision. Kids want to do drugs, drive fast, eat an entire boxfull of ice cream, eat all of their holloween candy on one night ETC. they're not allowed to because their judgement is so bad and THEY DON"T PAY ATTENTION TO THE CONSEQUENCES.
This is what I was looking for. However, what about the children who are more mature than their peers? You cannot arbitrarily set an age where all children are mature enough to have sex. For some, it will take longer, or less time, to fully mentally and emotionally mature. Anyway, I have strayed off topic, as I don't believe any 0-14 year olds are ready for sex.
 

jewscout

Religious Zionist
Paedophilia is wrong because a child is incapable of making decisions on their own regarding sex or sexual activity...frankly they don't realy know the deal and so to exploit that is wrong.

and no offense Druidus, even at 16 i didn't know the whole deal, i thought i knew everything and no one could tell me $#!+ but looking back i didn't know what the hell i was doing and i thank G-d that i'm not 6 feet under or in jail right now
 

Druidus

Keeper of the Grove
and no offense Druidus, even at 16 i didn't know the whole deal, i thought i knew everything and no one could tell me $#!+ but looking back i didn't know what the hell i was doing and i thank G-d that i'm not 6 feet under or in jail right now
I know that I am inexperienced in the world. I readily accept it. That's why I posted this thread! To gain insight! :jiggy:
 

anami

Member
Dinogrrl said:
Hey, even at 18-almost-19 I still don't get the whole deal XD.

And if we reach ninety we laugh at the naivete of our youth at seventy
:jiggy:


There is always more to learn!
 

Fluffy

A fool
What, exactly, is the moral issue with paedophilia? Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's right to molest children, or take pictures of them for purposes of selling, but what, in essence, makes it wrong?
Well you used the word paedophilia so I assume we are just talking about the sexual addiction to pre-pubescent children. Please note that it is the pre-pubescent nature which a paedophile finds attractive, not the childs age. Therefore, and I mean this in the completely hypothetical sense, the thing that most people quote as being wrong with paedophilia, that a child will always be too young, is not necessarily the case since if a child hits puberty much later than normal (say 15) then a paedophile could legally engage in sexual intercourse with that child in some countries such as Canada. Obviously this is an unlikely situation so mostly it is the case that the child is too young to be able to make an informed decision on the matter.

What definitely makes it wrong is that it is an addiction. A paedophile becomes totally obsessed with their affliction and this is detrimental to their own health as well as others (obviously).

However I must stress that paedophilia is the term giving to the mental disease, not the act of having sex with children. So a paedophile who suffered from this but refrained from any such immoral acts (unlikely, unfortunately, because of its addictive nature) would not, in my opinion be immoral in any way. Similarly the disease itself cannot be considered immoral, merely the actions which the disease encourages people to do.

Secondly, imagine a child takes secret pictures of themselves, and hides them. When the child grows up, and finds them, the child decides to try to sell them. Is there something intrinsically wrong with this? Yes, as a child the person may have been unable to make such a decision, but he/she did make the choice on her own as a child to take the pictures, and now, as an adult, is making the choice to sell them. I honestly can't find anything wrong with this, because if she sold them, she might help a paedophilic person keep away from real children.
I would think this is wrong because, as I said, paedophilia is very very addictive. If I were a paedophile then excluding myself from society might allow me to prevent myself from going out and raping a child. Masturbating over some child pornography or reading stories involving children would only make it harder for me to control myself. So in other words, your main benefit of having sold the pictures, of keeping paedophiles away from children, would actually, imo, have the exact opposite effect.

Thirdly, I know that many fantasies of male children of age of puberty focus on older women. I know this, because four, and even five years ago, I had such fantasies. Because I wanted this, and it was like a dream, why would it be wrong for someone to grant it to me? For this issue, my answer is much more clouded. The moral implications are great. Was I, as a child, capable of making such a decision? However, I am not definitively swayed in either direction. I don't want this to be an argument over whether in practice it would be possible or not to know if a child granted consent/actively pursued sex with an older person, but if presented with the opportunity, can any child make the choice?
This is totally natural because it is instinctive to be attracted to a women who has passed most of her puberty. Conversely I would propose that it would be natural for a person to be attracted to someone younger who had completed puberty also. Yet I see physical maturity and mental maturity as being largely independent. Therefore ones completion of puberity should not be an indicator that one is mentally mature enough to make any kind of sexual decisions.

Also I would like to say that I am sorry that some people found this thread offensive but I honestly cannot find any harm in discussing a very important issue, especially since such a discussion is essential in deciding how it is most effective to deal with that issue. I can totally understand, having had my own experiences with paedophilia, how some people would rather not discuss it and, that is your choice, of course, but I would suggest that such feelings are coming from your own experiences and not about what is being said in such a discussion, therefore taking issue with the discussion itself is unlikely to make you feel better or help you in any way.

My sincere sympathy to anyone who's lives have been inflicted with such a terrible thing as this.
 

anami

Member
Fluffy said:
Also I would like to say that I am sorry that some people found this thread offensive but I honestly cannot find any harm in discussing a very important issue, especially since such a discussion is essential in deciding how it is most effective to deal with that issue.
My sincere sympathy to anyone who's lives have been inflicted with such a terrible thing as this.



If we are discussing the solutions, we should look at the fact that as soon as the word comes up people dive for cover. Secerecy is the biggest problem for it gives preditors a place to hide. If adults were not so socially afraid of such taboos subjects, i am noticing even my dodgeing of using the word now (though that may be to my spelling deficiency)

If this was not a taboo subject, if it were discussed, everyone would know who the pedifiles are even if they have not been convicted.
In my case when i was young i saw nothing wrong with my oh so mature friend dating a thirty year old, until i found his kiddie porn collection!!!!
Reality check!
i have no problem when i come across him at parties or friends houses where there are children, i have no problem saying, "That man likes to look at pictures of naked children, he can not be here."
i would reckon he hates me, but it is not worth it to be quiet, what could happen if i said nothing? Secrecy, a bay of space. There is no way in hell he would actually molest a child now, he can't.
If all of the adults are talking about it, how it is not right or ok in the vein of the adult involved, children could no longer be told their parents will get angry if they tell about abuse. Children will feel like they can say, "Hey that guy /woman is creepy, they were trying to get me to go to their house", or take off my pants, or whatever.

Sometimes knowledge is power.
 

kreeden

Virus of the Mind
jewscout said:
and no offense Druidus, even at 16 i didn't know the whole deal,
At 50 { almost } I still don't know the whole deal . ;)

As for someone selling pictures of their self , I would have no problem with that . I would be concerned for those buying them perhaps ? Depending upon the pictures . I see paedophila as preying on the weak . If that makes sense ? There is more to it then that , but close enough .
 

Littlefoot

New Member
Druidus said:
Littlefoot, you have answered my questions very clearly, I thank you.

welcome. Thats what i try to do.

Is prostitution immoral, if the prostitute is doing it of his/her own free will, without a pimp? I agree with your statement, however.
Mildly. You are running a very high risk of getting a disease, which is your own bussiness, but it can be transfered to your ... clients, which is their bussiness, however that disease can be transfered to their spouses.. who did nothing wrong. I can see making it illegal but i honestly have to wonder if it would be better off regulated instead.




This is a reason that I now believe my second question is more difficult to answer. On the one hand I value freedom to do what you want so long as you hurt no one. I value that a lot. On the other hand, indirectly, one may harm children by the release of the photos.
What actions actualy cause others harm is very difficult to determine. No one his hurt by me pointing on a corner and going "he went that way he went that way!" .. however if you're pointing the wrong way and throwing the cops off the action causes harm by letting the criminal get away. Its a very vauge issue.



This is what I was looking for. However, what about the children who are more mature than their peers? You cannot arbitrarily set an age where all children are mature enough to have sex. For some, it will take longer, or less time, to fully mentally and emotionally mature. Anyway, I have strayed off topic, as I don't believe any 0-14 year olds are ready for sex.
Littlefoot: Legaly we can and we have. Its illegal for someone over 18 to have sex with someone under 18.. its something like that elsewhere besides new york right? Its not illegal for a minor to have sex, its illegal for someone to have sex with a minor. Big difference. As an adult you know whats not legaly allowed.
 

NRJ

New Member
Definition of Paedophilia/Pedophilia

A paedophile/pedophile is someone who has a sexual attraction/preference for pre-pubescent children. This may or may not involve sexual activity, many pedophiles never have any sexual contact with children. They can be exclusively attracted (meaning that they are only attracted to such ages), and they can be attracted to solely one gender (female, or male), or both.

While often used in reference to an attraction to any person under the Age Of Consent, specifically the term refers to an attraction to children between the ages of 4 and 12. Nepiophilia (attraction to infants and toddlers) and Hebephilia (also Ephebephilia) (attraction to pubescent teenagers) are often overlooked and joined into a broad definition of Pedophilia.

Who are Pedophiles?

Pedophiles come from all walks of life. Doctors, lawyers, judges, Police, athletes, nurses, pilots and more. There is no "defining" requirement to be a pedophile.

What causes Pedophilia?

There is no single event or experiance that can turn someone into a Pedophile. Many pedophiles share the belief they were born that way. Some are able to cite a particular event or moment when they knew they were a pedophile. To be a pedophile requires no mental disability or malfunction, and therefore to say that a pedophile is in any way more dangerous than a non-pedophile is a fallacy.

How can a Pedophile be cured?

There is currently research that proves and disproves the notion that pedophilia is a mental illness.

The most recent definition provided by the American Psychiatric Association, or ASA, in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual DSM-IV-TR.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th edition, Text Revision, American Psychiatric Association defines pedophilia thus:

Diagnostic criteria for 302.2 Pedophilia


A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually
arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity
with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).


B. The person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies
cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.


C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than
the child or children in Criterion A.


Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an
ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.
The most recent revision removes the requirement that an individual has acted on these fantasies, or engaged in a sexual relationship with a child.

At the last symposium, in 2003, however, it was suggested that 'pedophilia' be removed from the latest edition of the DSM. Dr. Charles Moser of San Francisco's Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz of the University of Ottawa presented conferees with a paper entitled "DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal." Though there was support for the proposal within the psychiatric community, there was also significant public outcry and pressure from child advocacy groups. In the end, the debate was dropped.

Unreliable research

One of the problems surrounding the study of 'pedophilia' is the unreliability of research. Many studies which claim to study 'pedophilia' do not use a representative sample. That is, they often study child sex offenders and claim that their conclusions are representative of 'pedophiles' in general. Such a study does not take into account the 'pedophiles' who do not commit sexual offences against children. It also does not consider that many child sex offenders are not 'pedophiles'. They are often 'situational offenders', or someone who engages in sexual activity with children not as their primary sexual preference but only due to a particular situation they are faced with, and would not otherwise engage in such activity except for that situation. Such research, it would seem, is often not held up to the same rigid requirements of other scientific research.

Types of Therapy

Various types of therapies are often suggested for pedophiles to help them cope with their attractions, and to educate them in ways that keep them safe around children. Many studies have proven however that more often that not, therapy/counselling is ineffective. Radical measures such as chemical/physical castration are ineffective as well, as they do not address the real issue. A person's sexual preference is not driven by their genitalia.

It is quite obvious therefore that Pedophiles cannot be "cured" of their preference any more than a Heterosexual can be given "treatment" to become Homosexual.



Other therms:


Child Lover/Girl Lover/Boy Lover


"Child Lover" is the term coined by pedophiles to define those who have a sexual attraction to both male and female children (Girl lovers and Boy lovers are usually attrected to one gender), however this is only a small part, and indeed is not the main part of their attraction to these children. They love these children, and put their needs first, such as would a good parent for their child.

Infact, there are many similarities between parenthood and child love, warranting some to see child love as merely an excuse to add a sexual element into the bond of parenthood, however there is sufficient difference (for instance, having an attachment to a child who is not your child) to warrant a separate category.





Child sexual abuse

A perpetrator committing child sexual abuse is commonly (and often, but not always, mistakenly) assumed to be a pedophile, and referred to as such; however, there may often other motivations, much as adult rape can sometimes have non-sexual reasons. Most perpetrators of child sexual abuse are not primarily interested in children—a fact which has been recognized by law enforcement2. They are sometimes referred to as pseudo-pedophilies or situational offenders, whereas pedophiles primarily attracted toward children are called structured pedophiles or fixated pedophiles, as their orientation is fixed by the structure of their personality.

The term pedophile is not used legally, and is not a legal category; an act by a child molester of molesting children is not legally referred to as pedophilia. However, newspapers and other news media frequently make erroneous use of the terms accused pedophile or convicted pedophile in reference to individuals accused or convicted of sexual abuse of children; other strange terms such as "serial pedophilia" have also come into use.
 
Top