Ped0philia

[The Sum of Awe]

No, but they are philiacs.

So is everyone else who is attracted to something?

I am not assuming all pedos are rapists. I am assuming that humans, in general, are weak and at the mercy of their desires. I would not leave an addict alone with their addiction, and if they happened to be the vicinity of their desire I would be justifiably wary, especially if acting on that desire would result in very bad results.

Just because you are around a lady and you are a heterosexual, does that mean you'll rape her?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Rape is non-consensual sex. Children by law cannot be said to consent. Therefore all sex with a child is rape.

I know, I said that in my post.

In reality the only way possible is rape.

Do pedophiles lust about them being raped or just about them having sex with them?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

So is everyone else who is attracted to something?

Suffixes with the common part -phil- (-phile, -philia, -philic) are used to specify some kind of attraction or affinity to something, in particular the love or obsession with something.

Just because you are around a lady and you are a heterosexual, does that mean you'll rape her?

Once again you are equating an adult with a child. Children are not adults. Is it not wise to be wary of your children spending long periods of time alone with a known pedophile?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

I know, I said that in my post.

In reality the only way possible is rape.

Do pedophiles lust about them being raped or just about them having sex with them?

There is no difference, as sex with a child is rape.

 

[Skwim]

we have to accept that their sexuality is there and cannot be controlled.

Why can't they control it? My friends and I all control ours.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Suffixes with the common part -phil- (-phile, -philia, -philic) are used to specify some kind of attraction or affinity to something, in particular the love or obsession with something.

So are you claiming now that all pedophiles are so obsessed that they'd rape a kid if they'd get a chance to?

Once again you are equating an adult with a child.

Doesn't matter, this lady is not expecting it and does not want it from you.

Is it not wise to be wary of your children spending long periods of time alone with a known pedophile?

As I said, it's fine to watch them, but not to so much where the pedophile feels uncomfortable when he might not have done anything.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Why can't they control it? My friends and I all control ours.

I meant can't control that they have it

 

[The Sum of Awe]

There is no difference, as sex with a child is rape.

Not in their fantasies?

Are they really wishing to rape them? If they had a chance to make it so they are not raping them wouldn't they?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

So are you claiming now that all pedophiles are so obsessed that they'd rape a kid if they'd get a chance to?

I'm saying that the term is directly connected to ideas of obsession. Perhaps we should progress a new term: pedosexual.

Doesn't matter, this lady is not expecting it and does not want it from you.

Then how does this paint the man in a bad light?

As I said, it's fine to watch them, but not to so much where the pedophile feels uncomfortable when he might not have done anything.

It's not a matter of them feeling uncomfortable. It's a matter of privacy and safety.

Not in their fantasies?

Are they really wishing to rape them? If they had a chance to make it so they are not raping them wouldn't they?

If they had a desire to have sex with a child, it doesn't matter if they see it as rape or not. It's rape either way. It doesn't matter what they fantasize about because the action will always be rape.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I'm saying that the term is directly connected to ideas of obsession. Perhaps we should progress a new term: pedosexual.

Hmm, alright, fair enough. I agree they should make that a word.

Then how does this paint the man in a bad light?

What do you mean? He would be attracted to her, thus he would rape her if you're correct.

It's not a matter of them feeling uncomfortable. It's a matter of privacy and safety.

Then you better watch every straight person because there has been many rapes in that sexual act as well.

If they had a desire to have sex with a child, it doesn't matter if they see it as rape or not. It's rape either way. It doesn't matter what they fantasize about because the action will always be rape.

What I was saying is the similarity that the other member gave was a bad one, because pedophiles don't WANT to rape the victim, they just want sex with it.

"I want to rape a woman" should've been "I want sex with a woman that wouldn't enjoy it" In reality it'd be rape if they act upon it, but they don't want to rape them, they just want to have sex with them.

 

[Drolefille]

What I was saying is the similarity that the other member gave was a bad one, because pedophiles don't WANT to rape the victim, they just want sex with it.

"I want to rape a woman" should've been "I want sex with a woman that wouldn't enjoy it" In reality it'd be rape if they act upon it, but they don't want to rape them, they just want to have sex with them.

No, if someone said "I want to have sex with a woman against her will" it is the equivalent of "I want to rape a woman." There is no "just wanting to have sex" with them, that is the definition of rape.

Children cannot consent to sex therefore anyone who says "I want to have sex with a child" is saying "I want to rape a child."

Just because they do not see it as rape does not change the fact that it is and cannot be anything else.

Rape is not always just about force, but coercion, threats, and particularly in the case of children - a violation of trust.

 

[Kerr]

Wrong already, Pedophiles don't have desires to rape them, just to sleep with them. If you are going to compare their sexuality to that of a heterosexual you should just say "if someone has desires to sleep with women".

If women didn't know what was going on, if they didn't really get a choice, it'd be rape and thus bad, that's why molesting children is bad, it's rape. But pedophiles most likely don't have a "fetish" of raping them, just sleeping with them. In reality the only way it works is raping.

I was not saying pedophiles desire to rape children, I was saying that is what happens when they act on their desire. And that is the reason it is a good idea to keep an eye on them around children. Just as it would be a good idea to keep an eye on that fictional person who desired to rape women (even if they are different the consequences of their actions, if they are on their desires, are the same).

But if you aren't sure if they'll act on it why make them feel uncomfortable. Watch them all you need but don't do it so much that you go into their private bubble.

Because that is the effect children has on people. They are... valuable. It affects how we humans think and act, for better and worse. That is why people react the way they do to pedophilia.

And no, I am not talking about going into their private bubble. Just saying keeping an eye on them is a good idea, not saying stalking or spying on them is.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

What do you mean? He would be attracted to her, thus he would rape her if you're correct.

Nope. You said that the issue was making the pedophile "feel bad". Does the man in this case become negatively impacted if a woman acts cautious around him?

Then you better watch every straight person because there has been many rapes in that sexual act as well.

As long as it doesn't impose on their privacy, by all means.

What I was saying is the similarity that the other member gave was a bad one, because pedophiles don't WANT to rape the victim, they just want sex with it.

"I want to rape a woman" should've been "I want sex with a woman that wouldn't enjoy it" In reality it'd be rape if they act upon it, but they don't want to rape them, they just want to have sex with them.

In really, it really doesn't matter what the intent is anyway so what's the point in making the distinction at this time?

 

[Drolefille]

Here's my question, why does the OP think that sexually oriented pedophiles who have never acted on their attraction are suspected and watched by society? While I agree that they WOULD be if people knew about it, there's no pedophile registry, there's a registry for child molesters. If a pedophile seeks therapy, a therapist is bound by confidentiality unless the client is threatening to harm a child.

There's not really a lot of opportunity for non-molesting pedophile oppression.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Nope. You said that the issue was making the pedophile "feel bad". Does the man in this case become negatively impacted if a woman acts cautious around him?

As long as it doesn't impose on their privacy, by all means.

This is what I was sayin' brooooo!

In really, it really doesn't matter what the intent is anyway so what's the point in making the distinction at this time?

Fair enough.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Here's my question, why does the OP think that sexually oriented pedophiles who have never acted on their attraction are suspected and watched by society? While I agree that they WOULD be if people knew about it, there's no pedophile registry, there's a registry for child molesters. If a pedophile seeks therapy, a therapist is bound by confidentiality unless the client is threatening to harm a child.

There's not really a lot of opportunity for non-molesting pedophile oppression.

Because once a pedophile admits it people will think poorly of her or him.

 

[riley2112]

Yes, but you're talking about pedophilia like it's a mental disease, otherwise pyromania is a very bad example.

We could have laws against not raping kids, of course, but if they are a pedophile we shouldn't just make the parents hesitate or make them look like a bad person around children, they might not even rape them.

It's like women watching men around homosexuals.

It makes a person feel uncomfortable or unaccepted

are you just trolling or are you really saying that pedophilia is not a mental disease?

 

[Drolefille]

Because once a pedophile admits it people will think poorly of her or him.

Please respond to my other posts that address the rest of your points.

But a) a pedophile doesn't admit it as a general rule, b) all mental illness is stigmatized, this isn't unique, c)it meets the criteria for a mental illness per the DSM.

None of that makes it ok, per se. But as there is no cure, only treatment, celibacy is a nigh impossible standard particularly for people who don't choose it and acting on those desires directly WILL cause harm to a child and looking at child porn also harms children it is for many complicated reasons a serious problem.

It's not like stigmatizing depression, it's like stigmatizing a schizophrenic who feels the urge to hurt someone because of their hallucinations. We lock those people up to protect others if they threaten harm.

Perfect world, it wouldn't happen. Realistic world, it happens. And this is coming from someone who is seriously in favor of the destigmatization of mental illness.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

are you just trolling or are you really saying that pedophilia is not a mental disease?

How is it? Has it ever been cured? Proof?


Are all abnormal fetishes a disease?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

No, if someone said "I want to have sex with a woman against her will" it is the equivalent of "I want to rape a woman." There is no "just wanting to have sex" with them, that is the definition of rape.

Children cannot consent to sex therefore anyone who says "I want to have sex with a child" is saying "I want to rape a child."

Just because they do not see it as rape does not change the fact that it is and cannot be anything else.

Rape is not always just about force, but coercion, threats, and particularly in the case of children - a violation of trust.

I know.
But they do not desire the rape, they desire what's within the rape. They could do without the rape.