Scots Taffer on 6/4/2006 at 04:09
Quote Posted by tungsten
Please give me the email adress of your kid. There's no such thing as too young, you know! :eek:
what <html>
Wyclef on 6/4/2006 at 04:15
Stitch laying it all out itt
While the Dia/high skool hotties tangent has been settled, the issue of attraction to pre-pubescent girls remains open. We all agree that pedophilic <i>acts</i> are repugnant, but there is some disagreement concerning the status of pedophilic <i>desire</i>. I would say that having the desire isn't necessarily blameworthy (for it cannot be controlled) but failure to attempt to work through/past the desire <i>is</i>, for it is not a healthy or appropriate one. (Aristotle has some relevant comments on drunkenness in the Nicomachean Ethics.) In fact, I think Stitch said as much.
The problem is navigating between the Scylla of moral relativism (not all desires are worthy ones) and the Charybdis of absolutism and unthinking condemnation. On what basis can we judge pedophilic desire unworthy and leave other, similarly "unnatural" desires -- like, uh, "watersports" -- uncondemned? Surely not consensuality, unless the ability-to-be-fulfilled-(ethically) is a criterion for the worthiness of a desire (I doubt it.) Or do we even want to leave other fetishes uncondemned?
mopgoblin on 6/4/2006 at 04:27
I think the difference between "paedophile" and "child molester" is important, and people don't differentiate between them properly. That's not good, because although it arises from a desire to protect children, it could deter a paedophile from seeking help or telling anyone, increasing the chance that they will become a child molester. I expect they tend to think they have enough willpower to keep in under control on their own, which doesn't often work.
Quote Posted by Scots_Taffer
Personally, I think there's a whole factor that's not being taken into consideration here which is that not every sexual inclination is naturally occurring - that is, that sexual fetishes can be derived from either psychological or emotional pressures and also perhaps the result of society.
Does that matter, though? Unless it's the result of conscious choices, and the person knows the consequences at the time, it's not really their own fault. Those are people who need help, and starting out by assigning blame won't help anyone. I recall there was a child molestation case here fairly recently against a person who was a member of a christian political party and advocated harsher penalties for child molesters. I think he was convicted in the end. These people seem to know that molesting children is wrong, but that alone is not enough to stop them. Not all of them, anyway. I reckon the best way is to protect children is for society to be less judgemental and fearful towards paedophiles who haven't harmed anyone, rather than push them into isolation.
Scots Taffer on 6/4/2006 at 04:37
Yeah, I know, sorry I was trying to get towards what's being generally agreed on now - that people with paedophilia as a sexual tendency need help and that it's not as acceptable as homosexuality (don't blame me, I didn't start that tangent!).
TheGreatGodPan on 6/4/2006 at 04:40
I was completely planning on posting this one above when the subject of psychology came up, but then it slipped my mind.
Former American Psychological Association president Nicholas Cummings (the guy who got homosexuality removed from the list of disorders) says (
http://instapundit.com/archives/029167.php) psychology is a declining field. Doctoral psychology is the lowest paid profession in doctoral health care.
Koki on 6/4/2006 at 05:27
Quote Posted by Stitch
Their bodies may be nice but all you need to do is spend ten seconds talking to one to realize that teens are, in fact, still kids. Teens are still developing mentally, and sneaking into their pants by pretending to give a shit about MySpace and Hawthorne Heights is just predatory and repugnant.
Are we talking about sex, dating, or Love For Life? Because I think these are three different things.
If you go out with straight "You're hot. Let's fuck." I don't see a problem.
If you pretend your character/tastes/opinions/whatever just to get into their pants, then this is "predatory and repugnant" no matter how old she is.
Quote:
One other minor thing to note is there are faw fewer ways to privately indulge a kink like pedophilia harmlessly. While Shayde can get double stuffed action while victimizing nobody, kiddie porn is a different matter entirely.
There's a shitload of "Child Models" over the 'net. This is more or less legal.
Gingerbread Man on 6/4/2006 at 05:33
Quote Posted by TheGreatGodPan
...declining field...
Yeah, but he says it's a declining field because the rest of y'all are fucking it up with political correctness and stupid-ass restrictions.
That said, there's a WORLD of difference between clinical psychology and psychiatry. And an even huger world of difference between those two and research psych. You start looking at how much market research people get paid, how much it costs to have a poll developed, ergonomics and human factors specialists, and other hardcore applied psych disciplines, and you'll start to realise that it's only the LOL I GOTS A BA IN PSYCH NOW I CAN THERAPY PEOPLE AND WRITE SELF-HELP BOKKS people like Dr Phil and the what who are the decliners. And rightfully so.
Even though it IS gay that the decline is due to the crap that society puts on the science, a great big chunk of the decline is due to the vomiting synergy between these pop-psychologists / self-help gurus and a public that is largely associating those monkeys wth the actual scientists who bring you things like highway signs that are easier to read and machinery that doesn't give you a headache and cut your thumb off.
Anyway, with regards to Cummings, (
http://www.narth.com/docs/insiders.html) this is probably a better way to get at what he said for those of us who don't want to dick about with podcasts or whatever the fuck.
aguywhoplaysthief on 6/4/2006 at 05:40
Quote Posted by Koki
Are we talking about sex, dating, or Love For Life? Because I think these are three different things.
It should be plainly obvious what he was talking about if you read what you just quoted.
Stitch on 6/4/2006 at 05:58
Quote Posted by Koki
Are we talking about sex, dating, or Love For Life? Because I think these are three different things.
If you go out with straight "You're hot. Let's fuck." I don't see a problem.
With all due respect, that's because you're not that far from being a teenager yourself. Your peers also fall into the category of "generally too young for a night of bliss with Uncle Stitch," although not to the same degree that a fifteen year old girl would.
Physical attraction is only one part of the equation. Real sexual attraction takes place between the heads (lol not those u pervs) and I don't think healthy men can connect with teenagers in a way that is sexual. You may think it possible, but I guarantee that opening a line of flirtation would reveal her to be a kid and thereby kill the sexual attraction, replacing it with feelings of protection, irritation, or whatever.
And if not, you might want to consider applying for a position at the Department of Homeland Security.
