Paedophilia a sexual orientation - like being straight or gay Thoughts? >http://www.independent.co.uk/news/paedophilia-sexual-orientation-straight-gay-criminal-psychologist-child-sex-abuse-a6965956.html
Well if the research is proving it then I'm not going to argue against it because muh feelings and muh moral high ground.
Right now, Germany is doing extensive research on pedophiles and trying to get them help and whatever, so hopefully we'll have more information in a few years, and be able to determine if it can be cured, or if we can at least find a substitute that doesn't endanger children.
We could have had this research done fucking -years- ago in America but every time you even mention pedophiles you get the typical "KILL THEM ALL" and "CASTRATION IS THE CURE LOL" responses.
faggots, WE dont need defending from kikes, all they want children (especially White) to be whores. WE already have great pedos like Lewis Carroll and John Ruskin. great Whire Pedos. pedophilia make me care about children feelings and made me donate money to ill kid. but I dont want it to be legal. real pedos must protect children from sexual abuse, molseting, degeneracy and cp etc.
>>692659803 Brilliant! We'll spread acceptance of pedophilia through clapping and large crowds. Then when they aren't forced into shame and hiding, they can be the defenders of our young. Pedo-run nurseries, pedo-staffed playschools. We can finally relax knowing our svelt nubile children are in safe wandering hands.
>>692660906 Force society to accept it as normal and healthy, just like homosexuality. You wait, in 30 years acceptance of adult child sexual relationships will be forced on us and pedophiles will have the same legal protections as now exist for homosexuals.
Paedophilia is illegal because it is a fucking huge taboo. That, and because the girls biologically, and at times mentally, are not developed enough. Most people, i think, look at pedophiles and think of them as someone who would rape a child any given time they could get away with it, which is highly unlikely. Pedophilea is a sexual attraction to underage girls, yes, but it is rarely that pedophiles ultimately live out their fantasy. Who renembers the quote from the movie Nymph()maniac? From 2013? The woman mentions something regarding pedophiles, since their only sexual attraction is highly illegal and taboo. Since it is a sexual preference or attraction like homosexuality or whatever, it is to some extent a sexual orientation, but it is still fucking taboo. We have come to accept homosexuality and no longer consider it a disease, but treat pedophilia the same way we did homosexuality some 50+ years ago. Fucking hell, i dont know where to stand on this, both sides are both right and wrong at the same time...
Pedo's are attracted to PREPUBESCENT girls. It's a disorder. Being attracted to the girl in the pic is NOT a disorder she is of child rearing age. Biologically there is nothing wrong with fucking teenage girls. However it's not healthy psychologically to fuck them, society has deemed, so it's illegal if they're under 16/18.
im torn on this because i currently have a daughter. But also look at it this way. If a girl whos too young has a kid it can potentially hurt her physically. Lets say a kid has a baby at lets say 13yo. they def arent mentally capable of raising a child nor even financially capable. On that note what about porn. You know someone would recommend it be legal. IDK how that would work honestly
>>692657054 Naturally, humans used to develop mentally a lot faster, but plateau faster too. By the time you were 14 you were an adult, but the down side was, few adults had a better mentality than your average teenager.
Nowadays the bodies mature quicker, but mentally they're developing much slower, yet are able to continue developing for much longer before plasticity turns the brain rigid, crabby and unreceptive to new ideas, yielding more creativity, innovation, & productivity.
While great for governments and richfags reaping the $ off these labors, that's what's pointed to as the excuse for denying us all those sweet delicious 12 year old buttholes to squeeze into.
Eh. The Greeks managed to invent democracy, philosophy, and western civilization buttfucking kids all the live long day.
>>692659169 exactly the type of responces i saw when OP's link was on facebook. it may not be entirely their fault for their mindset, but who fucking cares right? but when it comes to all these fucking sissy marries floating around with all their self diagnosed mental illnesses they want special treatment.
>>692661349 are you fuckin' crazy ???? Child sexuality will never be accepted anywhere, even if our politics really like childs. Child molesters will never be accepted by the people except if our population is cunningly perverted years after years by a mass-manipulation programm. But we're not that idiot.
>>692662739 Yeah, and 50 years ago they said the same thing about faggots. Now we have positive gay role models on television shows gay marriage and special hate-crimes legislation designed to protect games from being bashed.
I feel like people put pedophile and sex offender in the same category, when not even all sex offenders are pedophiles.
Not only that, when Americans think of pedophiles, they're not thinking of pre-pubescent children. They're thinking of literally anyone under the age of 18. Hell, even if she's 19 and you're 41 they'll still call you a pedophile.
We have no fucking idea what the word even means, let alone how to treat it other than "lol bullet to the head!"
>>692663203 Physical damage is just part of it, there's also the issue of informed consent, and when cp is legalized, child labor. I'm not saying it won't happen eventually (greeks) but I think it will take a complete civilization overhaul before it does.
>>692663409 That's not the same you fuckin ...... i don't fin what word could describe you. I'm so angry by reading what you just wrote..... OMG WHAT KIND OF PIECE OF SHIT ARE YOU ??? Gay people have always been persecuted, but they were still adults, are you fuckin compring gay people and children ???
Children don't want to have sexual rights, PEDOS want children to have sexual rights, that's the fuckin difference ....
OMG you should win an award for your stupidity, I really think you are the most stupid person going to 4chan EVER.
Just Kill Yourself please, you shouldn't have any right to think.
>>692663409 So? Fifty years ago we gave kids mercury to play with and used asbestos as a salad topping, now they're banned. Does this mean other, unrelated and perfectly safe materials will be banned in the next fifty years? No. Not unless they're found to kill us. If child sex is bad for children, which it is, it won't be legal. You might want to check your logic, looks a bit slippy.
It's bad if it's rape. We haven't been able to actually prove it's bad if the child "thinks" they're consenting. Instead, we ironically proved that what makes the child think something is wrong (with them now) is telling them something is wrong (with them now).
Which is something that only happens in Clapistan.
Speaking in a not strictly negative way about pedophilia or even gay people isn't uncommon on 4chan, much less /b/. So after a while you get desensitized to the comments on an emotional level, and just respond to them plainly without any sort of emotional input.
>>692665164 It's really just hard to read. You pretty much said all there was to say so why would I bother repeating you?
I'd start with using a lot less caps lock. Then stop using punctuation like it's a pick 'n' mix. Use one question mark, one period (or three if you want to give it a '...' effect). Makes everything way more readable, and actually makes anything you type come across as more convincing.
>>692664435 Then tardtatoes, then fetuses, then horses and ducks, then unicorns. Do you what causal connection is, anon? Slippery slope fallacy? You sound like a creationist arguing that we can't change our understanding from the bible's literal word because What's Next After?! Soon We'll All Just Be Harlots And Murderers!
Don't sit here and pretend anyone is talking about male children, anon. We don't give a fuck about them. If you look at literally any article, even in the one about 40% of UK's pedophiles being female, the only thing people can talk about is cutting off dicks and shooting men in the head for being pedophiles.
I mean, how do you castrate a woman anyway? Besides, children who are molested and raped by women are obviously in a better position than those molested and raped by men. If it's a little boy he probably wanted it anyway, yeah?
They do. They don't even get any money. They just get attention, and for teenagers that's a currency in and of itself. The idea that if you're not an adult you're completely innocent each and every single time whenever you do anything wrong whatsoever, is a poison.
There is absolutely 0 evidence AND no logical explanation for the equation: "non-forced, non-cohersive sex = traumatization". Something bad actually has to happen for that to occur. This is nothing more than 20th century feminazi propaganda.
RAPE, as in FORCING them to have sex or using sex as a punishment, for example, does, though age doesn't matter with that one.
The only other possible way is by manipulating them to think that they are victims, that what they were doing was wrong, or that they were harmed by it despite clearly not having been harmed, which is ironic considering how much people supposedly are against "manipulation". Fucking hypocrites.
>>692666416 I certainly agree that some might be forced to do it, but with the rapid pace that technology is becoming part of children's (and everyone's) lives, it's inevitable that some will find out an east way to get attention online.
>>692666713 Correct, good job. If a younger boy "gets it" with an older woman, even just a kiss, people applaud him for being a man. There are plenty of prank/social experiment videos on YouTube where younger boys pick up adult women. Those videos are generally received neutrally. However, try filming a young girl picking up older guys prank, not only will the guys run away, but such a video will be received unfavorably.
>>692665184 But that's presuming it IS healthy for them to have sex, since morality and conduct are learned concepts. If we don't actually base the teaching of conduct on healthy, emotionally stable ground, we can make up shit all day. It's like the problem of eskimo infanticide. To those backward fucks, killing babies was perfectly acceptable, nobody lost sleep. But they were STILL KILLING BABIES. And I don't know who you think 'proved' child sex to be harmless (based on their learned perceptions?) I say FUCKING KIDS WILL FUCK EM UP FOR LIFE whether or not everybody pretends it's okay. Sexual practise should be preceded by sexual desire. Puberty first, then diddle as much as your culture wants
>>692667040 >There is absolutely 0 evidence AND no logical explanation for the equation: "non-forced, non-cohersive sex = traumatization".
>The only other possible way is by manipulating them to think that they are victims, that what they were doing was wrong, or that they were harmed by it despite clearly not having been harmed
Objectively speaking, this is all true. I doubt any serious scientific studies have been done on psychological harm as a result of non-forced sex. If I am wrong, feel free to link to the studies.
Many of the people who are traumatized as a result of sexual experiences in their childhood are that way because they were raped or otherwise forced to do things against their will. We never hear from the ones that were not traumatized because they don't think it's a big issue. How can they lead perfectly healthy, happy lives despite being exposed to the "ruin your life" experiences early?
sexual orientation is such bullshit. unlike gender identity, sexuality is fluid. and unlike the gender binary, gay and straight are socially constructed as well as pedophilia. this is because the way gender is expressed and sex is percieved is faulty.
i'll put it this way. if being a straight man means he is attracted to women and not attracted to men, then what about the women to whom he's not attracted to? if they are women, does this make him a little bit gay?
this is also why the arguement for traps being straight or gay is retarded. people dont look for men or women in sexuality, they look for physical features. most of which can be found on men and women alike. some guys like ass, some guys like big titties, some guys like flat chests, some guys like landwhales, etc. its not just sex and gender, those are just general signifiers.
It hasn't been proved to be harmless in all instances, but it's been shown that the actual "trauma", in instances where there was "consent", wasn't from the sex itself, but from people telling the child "Hey, be traumatized. You're different now and I will treat you as such".
I don't know enough about Eskimos to refute anything at the beginning. I've only just learned that allegedly they kill babies.
My whole thing is this, if science, research, and evidence says "Alright here it is", I'm going to still have my -beliefs-, but I'm not going to present them as facts if they aren't factual, just to feed into the hivemind.
For instance, if you're viciously fucking a 4 year old in the ass, what the fucking fuck. But if you're fucking a 12 year old it's like "That's going to backfire on you when she's older", but I'm not going to tell her she's scarred for life. Everyone else will do that for me.
>>692658560 all sexual preferences are learned and developed through childhood experience, theyre just inherent and involuntary compared to personality disorders which the patient is in full control of
>>692668324 I think you're wrongly criticising a general categorisation. You're not gay for not liking fat women, that's a moronic thing to say. Rather, we have constructed an attraction binary which doesn't always describe people 100%.
Plenty of people like one gender the most, maybe like another gender a little bit and don't consider themselves bisexual. It doesn't mean the whole concept of sexual orientation is suddenly bullshit, it just means that there's a little nuance to it that you apparently can;t comprehend.
>>692665947 Sexual urges are developed biologically. Just because kids like attention and fucked up adults focus their lust on them doesn't make it an even playing field. And if they want to rub their baby errogenous zones to feel good like a back scratch, cool, they can figure their bodies out, and we should accept that. Participation of an adult introduces a lust that children can't understand biologically. The attraction they feel is to attention and approval from a figure in power over them, as all adults are. It's always rape.
That being said, considering I am a pedophile, I have not once ever wanted children to have a sexual right. The developmental years are the most important one to them and sexual interaction can ingrain ideas of sex that aren't true. People aren't meant to be mindless fuck machines and no one has any right to force sex on anyone regardless of gender, age, or identity. I don't need to have sex with a child, even if I'm attracted to them, nor would I ever want to subject one to a possible future similar to my own. It's the same self control that keeps people from haplessly raping someone else and the idea that you believe that because they're attracted to someone that they have to have sex with it shows that you're a narrow minded moron who has none of that anyway.
tl;dr I don't need to have sex with a child and so I wont, for everyone's sake in that predicament.
That's possibly the most delusional thinking I've ever read. Kill yourself.
You don't know shit about child sexuality. I remember having sexual fantasies from as young as three or four years old and have heard of MANY MANY people in similar or even more sexual situations without being "traumatized". They just tend to not to talk about it publicly because of pieces of shit like you, trying to turn them into victims, though I have seen a few situations where it happened, only resulting in more proof that society wants you to believe you're a victim by them saying "hurr durr u need help, ur obviously traumatized lol I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about".
You are literally cancer of society. Once again, kill yourself.
>Judy has sex with a boy her age >turns into a huge slut
>Samantha has sex with an older male >turns into a huge slut
I'm not seeing what the "adult" factor has to do with anything, other than maybe teaching your children sexual moderation and the values that accompany it. Sex is enjoyable (for many), they're going to seek it out regardless of who actually answers the call.
An older person isn't inherently taking advantage of them for the sake of taking advantage of them, and you're making the assumption that -all- instances of adults (over AoC) with those under the AoC are done with ill intent.
>>692669782 You probably think I'm the guy you were arguing with before, therefore you want to disagree with what I said. You can't think of anything, so you're being a childish cunt. Let me spell it out:
1. Not all underage people are pre-pubescent. 2. Therefore being pre-pubescent and being underage are not the same thing.
>>692668326 >>692668862 >You're not gay for not liking fat women, that's a moronic thing to say I didn't say that. I was just pointing out how theres a lot of flaws with the categorisations based on sex because its really about general physical characteristics.
I'm not denying the clear trend in nature where people are attracted to the opposite sex. Labels like gay, straight, bi, ace, or whatever the fuck tumblr made up today do make it simple to describe these trends in sexuality. However, I'm saying that these terms are arbitrary and innacurate as descriptors, and sexuality much more complex than the percieved sex of the object of attraction.
You guys will solve nothing by arguing in this thread. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. This is an issue with TOO MANY FACTORS, and it cannot be resolved with a single answer.
The best way to go about it would be to drop all assumptions and everything you've been taught and start with a blank slate. Collect objective evidence on a per-case basis and make a judgement as to whether or not it's a sexual orientation, disease, whatever.
The amount of studies on this is ridiculously low, and bias in existing studies hampers effective conclusions. Just look at pic related. I highly doubt that is true, and it probably isn't because of the lack of a random sample.
>>692669649 Food for thought: what if the 7 year old stumbles across a movie on Netfilx or whatever that depicts sex and wants to try it. What would be the appropriate response?
And I agree with the 16 or 17 thing.
Personally, I think anything over puberty is should be none of the business of anyone else. However, we should do our best to educate about birth control control and diseases. Which does happen, because I remember sex-ed in 6th grade, when everyone was around 11/12.
>>692670351 Of course they're arbitrary, they're a way for us to categorise people. However, if a guy considers himself straight, he's going to be sexually attracted to women with favourable characteristics. This is what we call straight, and I don't see what the problem with that is.
I think he's not understanding how it can't be used as an if-then statement.
Ex. If all underage people are pre-pubescent, then all pre-pubescents are underaged.
This would be a true statement, but not -all- underaged people are pre-pubescent (unless you're in Mexico), which is what makes it false. If 18 is the AoC, and I'm 17, then I'm underaged. But I can shoot milk out of my wiener, so I'm not pre-pubescent.
>>692669408 You're talking about children dude ... two 4year-old children playing doctor together is normal, I used to be a normal child too. But 4year-old children having sex with an adult is a different thing, and I'm talking about this.
Pedophiles are attracted to kids because their brains are fucked up, the chemicals that makes you attracted to people of similar age doesn't work for them. It's a mental disorder, not a sexual orientation. They should develop a treatment for it, but since it's a taboo, getting the funds is virtually impossible. Society would not approve this ''generosity'' to pedos. It's not their fault they are sexually attracted to kids.
But it's theirs if they decide to rape someone. The child aspect is sad, but it is only normal to them in their minds.
>>692671000 >Pedophiles are attracted to kids because their brains are fucked up, the chemicals that makes you attracted to people of similar age doesn't work for them. What are these chemicals?? Oxytocin? Sexual preferences are based on neural pathways.
>It's a mental disorder, not a sexual orientation. The attraction itself can't be pathologised. There has to be other issues like impuslivity around children or thinking it's ok to rape kids. Even then this is all behavioral, there's no neurological pathology that causes this.
>>692669811 Maybe, anon, maybe. In any case it's a moot point for us here today. We already live in this culture with it's twisted ashamed 'teachings' about sex and that's inescapably ingrained in every fiber of our traditions. A child who has sex in this culture will inevitably look back at it as weird/bad/confusing. Maybe it isn't ingrained but it's still inevitable. That's where I have to lay down my phone and bow out. Tfw you've been arguing with a recovered pedo. Tfw you sound just like I used to before the therapy when I justified my loli habit.
>>692658776 Well, that depends.. The word fetish describes a thing that one can't be aroused without. If one can still be aroused and satisfied without the fetish, it is not a fetish, it is a sexual orientation.
I was raped at age 10 by some perv pedo who tricked me into coming into his house. A neighbour. Just once. I never told anyone as a child, kept it a bitter secret, which filled me with hate. As an adult I've learned to cope with it, as just an incident which should not have happened but did happen and about which I can do nothing.
Mynown attraction to young girls has existed as long as I can remember, since age 6 at least. In my 50's it's as strong as ever. But exists only as an attraction, an idle pastime as I watch beautiful, intelligent young girls from about age 8 to 13 with fervent interest. Never touched a child inappropriately, never will. I'm married, have a son and a daughter. Neither has had anything to worry about from me and I've been an exceptional father, both growing up to be healthy, sane adults.
Is this attraction natural? I believe so. Nothing about it changed because of the attack against me. I've always lusted after girls, that's all. And I've known since I was a teenager that doing anything about it was wrong. That part was informed by the attack. I knew the man who did it was a bad person, weak willed, unable to control his desire, resulting in harm to myself. I would never inflict that kind of harm on a child.
It's just proving the existence of sexual exploration and thus sexual thoughts. Now, at 4, they're (probably) not going to fuck (although I do know some children who have), but as they get older, this exploration and these interests are going to become more blatant and more questions are going to be asked.
Now, if you're living outside of America, you're probably just going to explain what's the deal with penises and vaginas, but otherwise you'll say "Oh that's icky never do that again and don't talk to me about it either". Which, the media is just -FULL- of sexual...everything, so they'll figure out what goes where on their own, without any sort of influence saying "Yeah but don't post it online". (They're like 11-12 at this point)
Which is fine. While I got handjobs, blowjobs, and all sorts of other neat shit before I turned 10 (none of which did I initiate), I feel like after puberty, it's fair game. In every single solitary other species -other- than (American) humans, it's fair game. And even still only after like 1920 or some shit.
That's when sexual rights (whatever the fuck that means) comes in. They say "Oh I want to fuck" and we say "No you don't". And that's literally it. We don't say why, why not, how we know this, if it's true, or anything of that nature, because can't actually prove it. We just say they can't.
>>692672056 I didnt know psychiatrists were the holy arbiters of the one truth. Definitions are fragile and always up for debate. Prove to me that it's a mental disorder by using the characteristics of pedophilia itself as a source.
It's an *American culture thing. I have never known any other culture or society to ostracize children for their sexuality, because in other cultures they're taught that nudity is a normal and natural thing, and so is sex.
So they'll only look back on it as weird/bad/confusing if someone tells them "Oi bruv, that was weird/bad/confusing. Yer a freak now. Get therapy".
Literally why would you bother justifying loli? Whacking it to kids that don't exist who don't have the features of actual children? What is there to justify? Shit's fake.
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.