Do you think pedophilia is a psychiatric disorder?

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh


Just because a child hits puberty, does not mean it's ok, even if they "want it"! At that age, their bodies are growing faster than their brains, which is why they cannot drink till 21.... at that age they cannot make responsible decisions, which is why adults are supposed to help them make the right ones.....NOT prey upon them during a vulnerable time.

By the way, I do think that pedophiliacs are not right I'm the head.

I do think, however, that concerning ephebopbiliacs and hebophiliacs, the law needs to be a bit more lenient.

The problem is that, as seen in this very thread, you mention pedo, and everyone has a knee-kerk, wanting to cut off balls and rip out ovaries.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Reply to post by StealthyKat

BS. I know teens who drink repsonsibly and have sex responsibly. I also know teens who do not. There is no hard and fast rule. It comes down to ones own resposibilty.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

I would also like to add that learning responsibility comes down to the parents teaching their kids.




Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by Epiphron


Who cares why they do it? For every one of these animals who has been abused who then abuses a child there are thousands of human beings who were abused who take accountability for their actions and don't abuse.

You can endeavor all you want to find the root cause. You can waste your time in that fashion. Why bother. It is an act that should be punished by the most extreme measures. Should there be significant environmental factors, fine. Don't put them in prison. Put them in some other type of facility. Just get the animals out of the general population.

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh



Just because they CAN doesn't mean they SHOULD. It's a scientific fact that their brains are not fully developed. Read up on it.

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

How DARE you put the blame on the parents OR the kids! These pedophiles are very skilled at manipulation. There is NO exuse for it PERIOD. We aren't talking about teen sex here....we are talking about predators abusing children, and they are human trash.

Ok, I have to chime in here. To those simply trying to provide a logical viewpoint to a topic that so very often leads to hate and accusation, don't worry, not everyone knee-jerks a torch and pitchfork into existence. I get what you are saying and understand you are not condoning child abuse in any form. In particular thank you Lemon.Fresh for educating me on the definitions of pedo/hebe/ephebo.

In response to the OP: I believe, as others do here, that sexual preference for children is unfortunately just that, a sexual preference. Now we may respect the sexual preferences of gays but society obviously should not allow the abuse of a child, sexual or otherwise. Hence castration of individuals who cannot withhold their sexual desire of children may be the only resolution, however barbaric it may be.
To those who can control their desires and do not harm children, I wish them well and can understand that it must be quite difficult but I reinforce that they must not allow themselves to destroy the innocence of a child for their desires.

reply to post by Gehirn


Sorry....but there is nothing logical about child abuse. There is nothing sexy about a child. These people do this because they get a kick from doing something forbidden. I am so sick of people making excuses for deviants.....they do it because they want to. You are NOT born liking to defile little children....it is a perversion. I blame pornography for much of it, but that's another issue. Let me ask you this, if a guy is a rapist, should we say he was born with that "sexual preference"??? NO....it was something he DEVELOPED.....maybe there was an underlying psychological cause, but SO WHAT.....some one's daughter or baby will be scarred for life because it's his sexual PREFERENCE? Lock them UP.

Interesting....
I don't know why I like pretty women, and always have. Just the way I am. Sexual preference isn't a choice IMO. I can't force myself to be attracted to someone, or force myself to not be attracted to a woman I find attractive. Same thing goes for all the gay friends I have had. It isn't a choice for them. You either find someone attractive or you don't. To a certain extent, I don't think pedophiles have a choice in who they find attractive. I'm sure many of them wish they weren't attracted to young boys/girls.

But, you have to take accoutability fo your actions. You have to stay in control. If you can't control your actions, you deserve to be locked up. Just because someone is attracted to young boys/girls, doesn't mean they have to look at kiddie porn, and support the child sex trade. They don't have to spend time parked in their cars outside of elementary schools. They don't have to sexually abuse their daughters or daughters friends. One of the keys to life is controlling your emotions, and not act out when it can cause harm to others. If you aren't in enough control of yourself that yo cause harm to others, you don't deserve to be a part of society. I'm sure a lot of people have a sick thought every now and then, that they wouldn't be proud of, yet most people remain in control.

reply to post by MysticPearl


OK....but the point is....that when they CAN'T control their "urges"....a child's life is ruined. So even if they get help, that child is hurt FOREVER. So their "preferences" mean nothing. Studies show that it cannot be controlled. I don't care what consenting adults do, but this is something else.

Originally posted by StealthyKat
reply to post by MysticPearl

 

OK....but the point is....that when they CAN'T control their "urges"....a child's life is ruined. So even if they get help, that child is hurt FOREVER. So their "preferences" mean nothing. Studies show that it cannot be controlled. I don't care what consenting adults do, but this is something else.

That's true. Trust me, there is never an excuse for harming a child. I would just say there are different levels when it comes to "urges", and some can control them, and some can't. We don't know beforhand which pedophiles will act on their urges, and which ones won't. My quetion to you would be, at what point would you consider someone guilty as a pedophile? How would you prevent a pedophile from acting out beforhand? It's easy after finding kiddie porn on their computer, or they commit a sexual act, but before an act has been commited is much more complicated.

Originally posted by StealthyKat
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

 

How DARE you put the blame on the parents OR the kids! These pedophiles are very skilled at manipulation. There is NO exuse for it PERIOD. We aren't talking about teen sex here....we are talking about predators abusing children, and they are human trash.

Actually, I don't think we were talking about predators abusing children... You might be missing the point..

From OP:

At what age is a person no longer a child? Do they need to be of a certain appearance? Do they require a certain IQ before they'll ever be considered a real adult? What if they're 50 but have the IQ of a 12 year old? Where is the line drawn? When does sex go from a pleasure to a perversion and/or the result of a mental disorder, and for what exact reasons? Do we really have the right to tell someone they can't have sex because of their IQ, or their age, or their appearance?

I was 17 once...and I had sex with my still 14 year old girlfriend. When I was 20 (not even old enough to legally drink), I had sex with my 36 year old girlfriend. What's the difference between the two? Both were mature enough to consent, physically and intellectually. If anything, my 36 year old gf was LESS mature in both ways than my 14 year old gf due to prior drug use and anorexia! I'm pretty sure that doesn't make me "mentally ill". It's a slippery slope no matter what you try to define as law and, when it comes right down to it, I think it should be decided case-by-case with a very general law outlining such things as mental competence, physical maturity, etc. There are people who are sexually aroused by trees, right? Sure there's "mental illness" out there, but most of what the OP was looking at I'd have to say is falling outside that arena into just "preference" (and yes, a "preference" can be downright wrong/bad/punishable by law)

reply to post by MysticPearl


You have a point there.....I guess you really can't prevent it. Sorry if I got a little rude, this is just something I am very passionate about. But I think if they are caught....there should be NO second chances....at all....because they will do it again.

Paedophilia is not a psychiatric disorder. It's a spiritual disorder.

That's why psychiatrists are not capable of curing it. They're barking up the wrong tree.

I dont support molesting "children" as todays society defines them. That being said....I think its highly interesting that for the last....oh, say 500000 to 2million years that humans have been around (by varying estimates), all our forefathers, until the last 100 years or so, usually wound up mating with our foremothers at ages around 11-13. Now we are categorically labelling all of our fathers throughout all of recorded human history as "mentally ill" or "evil", or "sick bastards in need of castration or murder". Hm, always interesting to me.

Further more.....I think within limits, that just because sex happens to happen between two subsets of people should not always be assumed to constitute "abuse". For abuse to be the label, there needs to be some evidence of negative impact or harm. This easily rules out sex with undeveloped children, as there is obvious physical trauma and damage to the body. However, i somehow doubt that relations between teenagers and older adults are any more "abusive" than the relationships that teens go through with other teens.

Originally posted by pexx421
I dont support molesting "children" as todays society defines them. That being said....I think its highly interesting that for the last....oh, say 500000 to 2million years that humans have been around (by varying estimates), all our forefathers, until the last 100 years or so, usually wound up mating with our foremothers at ages around 11-13. Now we are categorically labelling all of our fathers throughout all of recorded human history as "mentally ill" or "evil", or "sick bastards in need of castration or murder". Hm, always interesting to me.

Going a step farther on that, the the human physiology has evolved for sexual arousal to be related to such "markers" as youthful appearances and mindset. This is likely a huge factor in why disney/nickelodeon are able to sell these teenage "divas" so effectively even today. Throughout most of history, the man became man upon reaching the ages of 16 to 25 and would then take a wife sometimes as young as 9 years old - if the girl had reached puberty, she was ready to be "married off" as quickly as possible.

thousands or millions of years of evolution does not a mental illness make - however, yes, rape is certainly still rape and abuse is still abuse...age isn't a factor in that end of things as both men and women over the legal age are raped and sexually abused every day all over the world.. I think the OP's questions boil down to "what constitutes abuse in relation to sex, and is the abuser him/herself to be considered 'mentally ill'?"...that's much easier question to answer

reply to post by WhizPhiz


Actually, it's about development on a neurological and psychological level. Children do not have the proper development in those ways to make the decision and give true consent, and those with extremely low I.Q.s never develop this ability. These are not absolutes, I never said that they were, and I will never claim that they are. I've already admitted that the lines are blurry sometimes, BUT:

The rules work in the vast majority of cases. Eradicating them just because there are a few exceptions is asinine.

reply to post by flyingdog

Actually, I don't think we were talking about predators abusing children... You might be missing the point..

Thank you for making that point and saving me some time.

I was 17 once...and I had sex with my still 14 year old girlfriend. When I was 20 (not even old enough to legally drink), I had sex with my 36 year old girlfriend. What's the difference between the two? Both were mature enough to consent, physically and intellectually. If anything, my 36 year old gf was LESS mature in both ways than my 14 year old gf due to prior drug use and anorexia! I'm pretty sure that doesn't make me "mentally ill".

Thank you again for giving us a perfect example of what I'm talking about here. An older man could have easily been charged with rape or something for having a sex with a 14 year old. And for those who say a 14 year old couldn't be mentally developed enough, why would their bodies be ready for sex if they weren't meant to be having sex? Around 14 years old the human body will be releasing a boat load of sexual hormones, but we try to suppress it and tell them it's wrong at such an age, NO WONDER they have the tendency to turn into sex fiends at that age!

reply to post by pexx421

That being said....I think its highly interesting that for the last....oh, say 500000 to 2million years that humans have been around (by varying estimates), all our forefathers, until the last 100 years or so, usually wound up mating with our foremothers at ages around 11-13. Now we are categorically labelling all of our fathers throughout all of recorded human history as "mentally ill" or "evil", or "sick bastards in need of castration or murder".

That's also a brilliant point I forgot to mention. I wonder why they were attracted to such young girls? Well this next reply might help shed some light on that.


reply to post by flyingdog

Going a step farther on that, the the human physiology has evolved for sexual arousal to be related to such "markers" as youthful appearances and mindset. This is likely a huge factor in why disney/nickelodeon are able to sell these teenage "divas" so effectively even today. Throughout most of history, the man became man upon reaching the ages of 16 to 25 and would then take a wife sometimes as young as 9 years old - if the girl had reached puberty, she was ready to be "married off" as quickly as possible.

Exactly, youthful appearance is directly related to sex. I could give a thousand different examples of what I mean by that statement, but I'm sure everyone gets the gist. Consider the following experiment:

We pick 1000 men at random. We show them pictures of young girls between 11 and 14 (the Hebephilia range). Most of these girls would be dressed in things like school uniforms, short skirts, and the skimpy stuff like you see young pop-stars wear. They would also be in very revealing/sexual poses. Now honestly, if we had all those men hooked up to brain activity monitors and showed them the pictures, what percentage of them do you think would become sexually stimulated by some of the images? My guess: an amount greater than 75% of the total 1000 men would be sexually stimulated.

Now I'm sorry if the following image offends some people, but it really helps to make my point here:


Have a guess how old this girl is. To men: honestly now, just ask yourself whether you find this girl even slightly attractive. Why do you find her attractive? Post an answer to that question if you feel courageous enough.
I'm going to be completely honest here, lying wont help anything. In truth, that girl is attractive IMO, and I would have found her attractive 5 years ago when I was only 15 - but it would have been perfectly legitimate for me to date her (and probably even have sex with her) at that age. So why do I have to now hide and lie about my attraction to young attractive school teen girls now that I'm out of school?

I think the OP's questions boil down to "what constitutes abuse in relation to sex, and is the abuser him/herself to be considered 'mentally ill'?"...that's much easier question to answer

Yes, that basically sums it up. Consider this: a girl like the one shown above seduces a man into sex (but he rigorously declined her offer at the start), and word manages to reach the police. Is it right that the man should serve jail time (he would in reality), was he wrong in having sex with a young girl who clearly wanted it? Was he mentally ill? Or was he just having some sex with another human being who was perfectly capable of it, and enjoyed it as much as him? Please explain exactly where the immoral factor comes from here when there is no victim or suffering of any type? The obvious conclusion is we simply think people younger than a certain age shouldn't be having sex, no matter if they want it or not, we attach an immoral label onto the act - for no clear reason that I can see.