pedophilia and pederasty - our new sexual orientation

[Unveiled Artist]

I would like some psychiatrist to explain me in detail what is in pedophiles' mind.
There must be something weird in their brain that pushes them to feel sexually attracted to prepubescent persons.
There is no justification, imho.

I'd say a better (in my opinion) question is not why people are attracted to children. We can't tell our bodies who we are attracted to, male female, young, or old. But I'd ask to "those" who commit child abuse "because of" their attraction (not their attraction defining the abuse), I'd wonder about that. I don't know if it could be distinctively because of their childhood. I had a relatively good childhood, but my attraction (to adult) females wasn't influenced in a straight-oriented environment. So, I guess it depends. Not all pedophiles act on their attractions. So, who knows.

Now that I think of it, off comment, I wouldn't think pedophilia is a sexual orientation insofar that sexual orientation refers to the "sex" a person's attraction is oriented not the age.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Well a preference for children (and animals) are orientations I dont think yhis is even controversial...... people cant control their sexual attractions

Obviously this doesn't mean that "therefore one can rape children" pedofiles are expected to control their sexual desires and learn to live with their condition.

They don't have a condition because of their attraction, though. Physiological and psychological attractions are natural. It becomes a condition when that physiology maybe harms the person maybe making her sick or have an illness (intelligent guesses). Illnesses don't depend on the object of the trigger (if so be). A trigger to seizures can be a strobe light but the seizure itself is not caused by the light but by the neurons in the brain that are triggered by it. Some people with the same head wire as mine are triggered by lights and others are not. But we have the same neuron wiring nonetheless.

Likewise, some pedophiles are child abusers and some are not, but by virtue of the name, they are attracted to children none the less. What makes it a condition is whether their attraction deteriorates their physical health not because of the object they are attracted to.

 

[Estro Felino]

I'd say a better (in my opinion) question is not why people are attracted to children. We can't tell our bodies who we are attracted to, male female, young, or old. But I'd ask to "those" who commit child abuse "because of" their attraction (not their attraction defining the abuse), I'd wonder about that. I don't know if it could be distinctively because of their childhood. I had a relatively good childhood, but my attraction (to adult) females wasn't influenced in a straight-oriented environment. So, I guess it depends. Not all pedophiles act on their attractions. So, who knows.

Now that I think of it, off comment, I wouldn't think pedophilia is a sexual orientation insofar that sexual orientation refers to the "sex" a person's attraction is oriented not the age.

I wasn't speaking of sexual abuse (that regards criminal law).
I was speaking of psychiatry. I am sorry...it is not an orientation...or at least, it is not an orientation that can find any rational justification.

For example...let'say I tend to be attracted to 50 year old males. That can be considered an orientation but 50 year old males are mature, consenting men.

Children, especially prepubescent children are not sexual beings. They did not have a complete sexual developpment so they cannot be the object of anybody's desire.

The difference is abyssal.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

For example...let'say I might be attracted to 50 year old males. That can be considered an orientation but 50 year old males are mature, consenting men.

Orientation, though, doesn't refer to the age and maturity of a person just their sex.

Children, especually prepubescent children are not sexual beings. They did not have a complete sexual devrlopment so they cannot be the object of nobody's desire.

I think that's probably the highest sexual point because children are "freshening up" for lack of better words into maturity. They are getting their scent and experiencing their body in a way adults have already gone through. So, I can see why that's attraction-the physical body of the other cannot control how he or she reacts to someone new to their sexuality-objectively speaking. I do find it odd that people can be attracted to all sorts of things and people. The human body is something.

The moral rather than physiological nature of it is, well, a totally different issue. I wonder why people mix the two?

 

[Estro Felino]

I think that's probably the highest sexual point because children are "freshening up" for lack of better words into maturity. They are getting their scent and experiencing their body in a way adults have already gone through. So, I can see why that's attraction-the physical body of the other cannot control how he or she reacts to someone new to their sexuality-objectively speaking. I do find it odd that people can be attracted to all sorts of things and people. The human body is something.

The moral rather than physiological nature of it is, well, a totally different issue. I wonder why people mix the two?

Then why do pedophiles not tend to come out?
Evidently they are aware that theirs is an unhealthy tendency, since children are defenseless asexual beings. So they probably feel ashamed.

Look...it is not a moral discourse. Law is amoral...that is, free from moral.
Law does defend the weakest defenseless people from those who can harm them, though.

 

[Estro Felino]

And btw... @Unveiled Artist ...this song perfectly expresses what I think of paedophilia. Lyrics describe pedophiles.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Then why do pedophiles not tend to come out?
Evidently they are aware that theirs is an unhealthy tendency, since children are defenseless asexual beings. So they probably feel ashamed.

Look...it is not a moral discourse. Law is amoral...that is, free from moral.
Law does defend the weakest defenseless people from those who can harm them, though.

I think it's like any person who may have experiences et cetera that the everyday public will shun them for. You kind of loose all your respect as a human being when people find out some things about you that isn't dangerous to others in and of itself. Some people get beat up for things like that, so they keep it to themselves. Most of the time, I think it's harmless.

Attraction itself (physiological and psychological responses) are not unhealthy in itself-and their healthiness isn't dependent on the object of attraction but how it affects the body (like any other illness).

I can see why many feel ashamed (like any person with sexual attraction that other adults deem inappropriate. Years ago, they thought homosexuals molest children just because of the sex of the individuals and nothing more). Likewise, people deem pedophiles as child molesters (or attempting as such) just because of the object of attraction (like the first example) and nothing more.

In this case, though, it is moral. Pedophile is someone attracted to other children. People find that immoral. The (US) law cares about what people Do not who people are attracted to.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Then why do pedophiles not tend to come out?
Evidently they are aware that theirs is an unhealthy tendency, since children are defenseless asexual beings. So they probably feel ashamed.

Look...it is not a moral discourse. Law is amoral...that is, free from moral.
Law does defend the weakest defenseless people from those who can harm them, though.

Well that is a joke. Have you actually looked at the responses that most seem to have to such - even here on RF? And it hardly varies apart from in a few countries - those that are perhaps more progressive or those where children have fewer rights and where their exploitation is more common. And apart from this, most countries don't have any support mechanisms in place, or just won't provide the resources necessary, even if there is anything other than controls rather than therapy that would enable change to take place.

So what exactly would encourage any with this attraction to come forward?

And in my opinion, the attraction is more like a fetish than a true sexual orientation, much like some others, and as such might be amenable to therapy, even if this is not a popular view.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

And btw... @Unveiled Artist ...this song perfectly expresses what I think of paedophilia. Lyrics describe pedophiles.

Could you give a recap?

The song is unsettling.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

"This is done because we are talking about historical perspectives of how gender relations and different types of sexual orientations have existed in history,” said BOUSD Assistant Superintendent of Curricula Kerrie Torres

No... it was never taught as "sexual orientation". It is taught as "deviate behaviors". it is breaking news.

Existed. It existed in history.

That’s the key word.

Are you saying it didn’t exist in history, or things that existed shouldn’t be taught in history?

Why do I get the feeling that if instead of pederasty, it was human slavery, and if instead of learning about its historical existence, they were waving Confederate flags and glorifying it, you wouldn’t have started a thread about it?

 

[Kenny]

Existed. It existed in history.

That’s the key word.

Are you saying it didn’t exist in history, or things that existed shouldn’t be taught in history?

Why do I get the feeling that if instead of pederasty, it was human slavery, and if instead of learning about its historical existence, they were waving Confederate flags and glorifying it, you wouldn’t have started a thread about it?

Why does it feel like this is a moving of goal posts along with a red herring fallacy?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Why does it feel like this is a moving of goal posts along with a red herring fallacy?

Okay, fair enough - that last question was facetious. Consider it withdrawn.

But seriously, going back to my other question: are you saying pederasty didn't exist in history, or that something which existed shouldn't be taught in history? This is a valid question, I feel.

The video in the OP doesn't give us many details except that pederasty is something that is taught which existed in history. Slavery, genocide, and lots of terrible and fantastic things existed in history - whether the subject is being dealt with appropriately depends on a lot more details than the video provides. As a matter of principle, at some point, students learning history have to be exposed to this because it occurred in history ... wouldn't you agree with this much?

 

[Kenny]

Okay, fair enough - that last question was facetious. Consider it withdrawn.

But seriously, going back to my other question: are you saying pederasty didn't exist in history, or that something which existed shouldn't be taught in history? This is a valid question, I feel.

The video in the OP doesn't give us many details except that pederasty is something that is taught which existed in history. Slavery, genocide, and lots of terrible and fantastic things existed in history - whether the subject is being dealt with appropriately depends on a lot more details than the video provides. As a matter of principle, at some point, students learning history have to be exposed to this because it occurred in history ... wouldn't you agree with this much?

Yes, I would agree and have no problem with it being historically taught at an appropriate age. Of course, as with slavery, it should be taught as something that is deviant and wrong.

 

[metis]

Of course, as with slavery, it should be taught as something that is deviant and wrong.

Would you please tell my wife that.

 

[Kenny]

Would you please tell my wife that.

I NEVER get in between two cats fighting - I end up getting scratched!