Pedophilia Activism -- Does Sex Harm Children?

A number of modern psychologists have begun scientifically studying pedophilia and a number of them have released papers that say that the assumption that children are harmed from sexuality is false. They argue that many children have positive memories of their childhood sexual incident. They believe that pedophilia should be normalized in society so that sex between an adult and child is like a child getting his or her first injection. It might be confusing and hurt but the childlove advocates claim it is beneficial for them in the future because as humans they are sexual beings and thus need to learn. Pedophile advocates are using the Internet to spread their ideas.

I'm not saying I agree with this but it's an interesting topic and would definitely be classified as alternative science. Have a look at the Wikipedia article for Pedophile Activism.

Pedophiles have tried to use scholarly arguments to rationalize sex between adults and children (See ICPE and its infamous online book Pedophilia -- The Radical Case). The best known pedophile organizations are perhaps NAMBLA and MARTIJN.

The Internet will certainly help pedophiles spread their ideas. The growth of the childlove movement can be approximated by the popularity of certain websites. A pedophile message board called Boy Moment seems to be getting quite a lot of traffic. The website Perverts 'R' Us, a repository of child sex fiction, has had more than 15 million visitors and at any one time the site averages about 60 visitors. Perverts 'R' Us is in no way connected to the childlove movement, but it is a pedophile site nevertheless and the popularity of Perverts 'R' Us can tell us something about the underlying demand in society for child sex. Once the latent urge within humans for something is released, these humans will naturally want to justify or rationalize their emotions to remove any guilt.

If you are against pedophilia, please sign an anti-pedophile petition.

We ask that these teachings be given full priority in Catholic private schools, with or without State contracts, as they are particularly high risks centers, as has been demonstrated all over the world by the number of condemned Catholic priests.

This is not true.  While cases condemning priests are much more public than the average pedophile case, the number of pedophile priests as a ratio to the total number of priests in any region is comparable to the ratio of pedophiles in a general population.

Which is to say, there are no more pedophile priests than say, pedophile teachers, or pedophile office-workers.

Not that they are then forgivable.  Priests should know better and be better.

This is not true.  While cases condemning priests are much more public than the average pedophile case, the number of pedophile priests as a ratio to the total number of priests in any region is comparable to the ratio of pedophiles in a general population.

Which is to say, there are no more pedophile priests than say, pedophile teachers, or pedophile office-workers.

Not that they are then forgivable.  Priests should know better and be better.

Well said, on all points.

-Erasmus

Yes, I would agree with that. The petition does have good intentions though.

They're not really paedophiles's though, as they they're really just wanting the minimum age of consent to go down or be removed. Still don't agree with them though.

Am I the onl one that findss the existance of a topic even implying that pedophiles may not be as horrible as we all belive highly offensive.
I mean seriously dude, they have sex with children, how is this not wrong?!

*Is highly offended*

I mean seriously dude, they have sex with children, how is this not wrong?!

How is it not right?

Because they have sex with children!

Because they have sex with children!

In what way is that wrong?

Ugh, you people and your social relativism.  Sure, we could call absolutely every belief we have into question, because we've got no real frame of reference on which we could base our definitions of "good" and "evil" (unless you're a theist, but then you'd have to prove that your religion is truth, good luck with that).  

I could ask "Why is it bad to kill people?",  "Why is it bad to steal?", "Why is it bad to sleep with my neighbor's wife?",  It's only your foolish social taboos based on the Judeo-Christian belief system that makes these things wrong.

For anything to be logically deduced to be good or bad, we have to first define good and bad, however, as soon as we do that, there are some people who will disagree with our definition, and we'll have to accept that they have their "good" and we have ours, and we have to tolerate their good because it's just as valid as ours; they're both products of social conditioning, and not based on any true, objective, scale of right or wrong.

But honestly, doesn't this kind of thinking digust you?  I'm sorry, but I find I have to believe that some things are good and some things are evil, absolutely, not simply as a result of my social conditioning.

Sorry, pedophelia is wrong.  Actually, come to think of it, I'm not at all sorry.  Pedophelia is wrong.

I have ot go with 6strings on this one. Of course it impossible using simple logic to prove having sex with children is bad. But it's logically impossible to prove anything is good or bad since defining good or bad in terms of pure logic. I disagree however that one needs to be a theist to hold a framework for good/bad. (note I am a theist but that irrelevant) The accept definiton of bad in the society in which I live (secular Canadian society) is that something that harms others is bad. Pedophillia harms children, evne if one was to accept the conclusion of studies done by pedophille advocacy groups (which for the record I dont and am sure that with a few minutes of research could blow holes into them) the simple fact is that pedophilla is by definition a kind of rape. In Canadian law no one under 14 years can consent to sexual intercourse. The global average for that age is 16 (legislation is being tabled in Canada to raise the age to 16). Since they cannot consent then its sex without concsent which is a crime in our legalistic democratic and perfectly secular framework.
Putting that aside unless your prepared to tell me in all honesty you'd have no problem with your 4 year old child having sex with a 40 year old man this abstract logical discussion is meaningless postmodernist bullshit. Pedophillia is a disgusting crime, robbing children of inocencethe ability to trust and in many cases warping them into repeating the pattern. It's a blighton society and I for one have no doubt as to the criminality and indeed the evil of it.
A deeply enraged
Cinlef

Children arn't developed mentally or physically for sex yet there fore having sex with them is wrong!

Did the flat earthers finally abandon their cause and convert to Nambla members.

Why is it wrong?

BECAUSE YOUR HAVING SEX WITH CHILDREN DUDE! THATS PRETTY f**KED UP RIGHT THERE!

Yeah, honestly, I think it's not just wrong, but also pretty creepy.

But I like to think that moral rules are grounded in some sort of sociobiological trends.  Like obviously in a species that depends so much on tribal cohesion for its strength, killing other tribe members or messing around with reproductive privileges (a.k.a. adultery) will screw up social cohesion.

The no-murder rule is important because not everybody in the society has the means of defending their life all the time, and still go about doing whatever else it is they do (like making clay pots or weaving baskets or hunting or whatever).  However, we still want them around for the services they provide.  So the society evolved in its members this instinctive rule that killing is wrong.

Among species where the cost of bearing and raising children is large for both members of a mating pair, neither partner can afford to spend time raising somebody else's children.

But is there a sociobiological explanation for the paedophilia rule?  I can see one for girls, maybe: we males seem to want our mates to be virgins, so it makes sense to criminalize "stealing innocence".  But what about boys?

-Erasmus

Perhaps it's much more cynical than this. Perhaps there is absolutely no moral right or wrong and that the idea of right or wrong in a society is understood in terms of the might makes right principle, that those with the power and money have the ability to influence the masses into believing what is right and what is wrong.

Some argue that Pedophilia is wrong because it feels wrong. This is the argument used by many homophobes, but today homosexuality is accepted much moreso than it was thirty or forty years ago, so the idea that there is some objective morality system seems shaky looking at the homosexuality case study. What happened to homosexuality may happen to pedophilia as well. Is it that hard to believe? Scientific studies that children can have positive sexual experiences, etc, presented to the public finance by rich and power activists...it's not hard to believe that pedophilia can and will be normalized in the future. Guy named Christopher says, "I should also point out that doing oral sex on your wife or husband was at one time illegal and subject to jail time, it was once illegal to have anal sex with your wife or husband and was subject to jail time, etc."

In my opinion, without some religion that states what is right or wrong like pedophilia is wrong or racism is wrong or killing is wrong then anything goes. This is like Plato's Noble Lie idea. So of course that may be why religion is used, but of course the pedophiles could create a religion of their own that does say that pedophilia is okay or they could modify existing religion. Religion can be modified. People do so to suit what they want to believe.

Pedophilia isn't wrong because it feels wrong, it's wrong becasue your performing an act with a person not mentally or physically equiped to handle it.

I suppose one way children can be protected is by having compulsory chastity belts around children that protects their private parts until they reach the age of consent, maybe 18 in most areas. Of course these chastity belts will need to be changed by government officials as the child grows.

Pedophilia isn't wrong because it feels wrong, it's wrong becasue your performing an act with a person not mentally or physically equiped to handle it.

What do you mean, "handle it"?  And once you describe your objection a little less vaguely, could you provide some evidence for your claim?

-Erasmus

A child is a person who hasn't gone through puberty. Puberty is the process your body undergoes to mature itself so taht it is capable of sex and reproduction. Untill this point your body is not designed to dead with the act of sex. That and having sex with children is jsut wrong how can any of you claim otherwise and maintain a pretense of being decent people?

Much as that isn't the most logical argument I've ever heard I have to concur hole heartedly. Why are we even having this conversation? Also doesn't it put the site at risk from being mistaken for one that promotes pedophillia. By at risk I mean legal trouble type things?
An irate
Cinlef

And this is why different countries have different laws dealing with age of consent, why 16 was an age where marriage was common centuries ago, why Islam is based around a guy that by modern standards was a child rapist.

So anyway, I guess that we're all in agreement that it's not good to have sex with prepubescent kids.

But the topic was, "Does it harm them?"  So, our conclusion is certainly, "It harms somebody".  But does it harm them?  What exactly is the harm?

-Erasmus

So anyway, I guess that we're all in agreement that it's not good to have sex with prepubescent kids.

But the topic was, "Does it harm them?"  So, our conclusion is certainly, "It harms somebody".  But does it harm them?  What exactly is the harm?

-Erasmus

Trauma?

Stealing of innocence, doing something they arn't ready for. Trauma. Possible physical damage in the genital regions depending on the age and development.

Stealing of innocence, doing something they arn't ready for.

Yeah, this is what I'm getting at.  Could we be a little bit more specific?  I mean, I had my innocencectomy and I wasn't exactly struck by lightning or anything afterwards.  I think.  Are you suggesting that after somebody has sex with a child, the child "turns evil" or something?

I submit that most people aren't "ready" for it the first time.  Unless maybe if they wait till their thirty and are about to go undergo nuclear fusion from horniness.

Trauma. Possible physical damage in the genital regions depending on the age and development.

Well yeah, I'm just wondering if there's something a little more profound than this.

-Erasmus

If you think sexual abuse doesn't harm people, try listening to the radio show LoveLine and see if Dr. Drew can convince you.  Look for a station in your area here:

http://www.dolland.net/loveline/stations/index.html

Quote from: "Flatearthersareretards"

Stealing of innocence, doing something they arn't ready for.

Yeah, this is what I'm getting at.  Could we be a little bit more specific?  I mean, I had my innocencectomy and I wasn't exactly struck by lightning or anything afterwards.  I think.  Are you suggesting that after somebody has sex with a child, the child "turns evil" or something?

I submit that most people aren't "ready" for it the first time.  Unless maybe if they wait till their thirty and are about to go undergo nuclear fusion from horniness.

Quote

Trauma. Possible physical damage in the genital regions depending on the age and development.

Well yeah, I'm just wondering if there's something a little more profound than this.

-Erasmus

STDs are quite bad. Most deifniately life ruining. I am a petifile, I have sexual thoughts about girls of the age of 14...



Though I am 14.

Quote from: "Erasmus"

Quote from: "Flatearthersareretards"

Stealing of innocence, doing something they arn't ready for.

Yeah, this is what I'm getting at.  Could we be a little bit more specific?  I mean, I had my innocencectomy and I wasn't exactly struck by lightning or anything afterwards.  I think.  Are you suggesting that after somebody has sex with a child, the child "turns evil" or something?

I submit that most people aren't "ready" for it the first time.  Unless maybe if they wait till their thirty and are about to go undergo nuclear fusion from horniness.

Quote

Trauma. Possible physical damage in the genital regions depending on the age and development.

STDs are quite bad. Most deifniately life ruining. I am a petifile, I have sexual thoughts about girls of the age of 14...



Though I am 14.

Well yeah, I'm just wondering if there's something a little more profound than this.

-Erasmus

You are impertinent, sir, to misquote me in so demeaning a manner.  My spelling alone is not to be trifled so.  I demand an apology!

Fixed.

I find this topic distasteful, it rubs against several taboos, as well as my sense of protection that I feel towards my future offspring. I have a wonderful six-year-old niece, a beautiful child, and the though of this sort of thing happening to her makes me want to reach for the axe. I do not condone pedophilia in any way shape or form

Having said that, this topic is intriguing. Erasmus, congratulations on keeping an incredibly inflammatory topic under control.

Treat this as an exercise, be factual and scientific in a highly emotionally topic.This thread is about triumphing over your emotions, and it's not easy.

I live in a country where about half of the population loses their virginity before the legal age. Admittedly, this is usually to people of a similar age, and a lot of the population is physically sexually mature long before they become legal. And here, the legal age is 16. This doesn't really take into account the general 'Doctors and Nurses' that most children engage in.

So, in the interests of honest debate, can we have a definition of pedophilia as a starting point

Legally it's having sexual relations with a minor. Yet there are many physicaly mature, consenting 15 year olds who consider themselves ready for sex, and go about gaining experience firsthand. I don't think that the people they experiment with are pedophiles, these young people are selecting their targets for themselves.

I'll propose one:
The act of having sexual relations with a minor who does not consider themselves physically or mentally ready for sexual relations.

Now, rip it to bits!

I'm all for this type of debate when it come to whether earth is flat.

How to explain my position?

Sex is, undoubtedly, highly pleasureable. The problem is, if exsposed to it to early, the emotional scarring leaves the child unable to enjoy it later in life.

Is that position really so assailable? That it is wrong to temporarily pleasure yourself for less than 30 minutes, while they are now unable to enjoy it for the rest of their lives.