The Pedo Agenda

14,016 Views | 230 Replies | Last: 6 yr ago by MemorialTXAg
Marco Esquandolas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Alright so seamaster and dad o lot, do you think pedophilia is somehow a learned behavior or a preference? Is there any amount of scientific and psychological evidence that would convince you that isn't? Let's find out who's really sticking their heads in the sand.

The whole "agenda" here as far as I can tell is that hey maybe shunning and hating these people and forcing them into social isolation is counterproductive to encouraging them to seek treatment, so that they are less likely to act on their desires? I mean, what is the best way to treat these children of God if it isn't that? Whatever we are doing now is apparently not helping.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Marco Esquandolas said:

Alright so seamaster and dad o lot, do you think pedophilia is somehow a learned behavior or a preference? Is there any amount of scientific and psychological evidence that would convince you that isn't? Let's find out who's really sticking their heads in the sand.

The whole "agenda" here as far as I can tell is that hey maybe shunning and hating these people and forcing them into social isolation is counterproductive to encouraging them to seek treatment, so that they are less likely to act on their desires? I mean, what is the best way to treat these children of God if it isn't that? Whatever we are doing now is apparently not helping.
I don't know and don't have any desire to research it.

I do not trust our society NOT to advance from "let's not demonize these people for their sexual orientation" to "let's celebrate these people for their sexual orientation"

Perhaps if this path hadn't already been traveled to normalize some sexual deviancy, I wouldn't be so cynical about it.

Given how many in modern society belittle suggestions of sexual morality as "old-fashioned" and "repressive"; it is not a great stretch to believe that once some subset of our population is identified as having a "sexual orientation" of "Minor Attracted Persons", there will be calls for understanding, and compassion. There will be attempts to provide them some type of "safe" outlet for their "orientation" because self-discipline and abstinence just aren't "reasonable expectations" for us weak humans. After all, "we're nothin' but mammals..."

In a society that valued and supported self-discipline and abstinence, this might be workable. In a society that values doing what "feels good", this is a path to endangering more children.
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
powerbelly
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dad-O-Lot said:

Marco Esquandolas said:

Alright so seamaster and dad o lot, do you think pedophilia is somehow a learned behavior or a preference? Is there any amount of scientific and psychological evidence that would convince you that isn't? Let's find out who's really sticking their heads in the sand.

The whole "agenda" here as far as I can tell is that hey maybe shunning and hating these people and forcing them into social isolation is counterproductive to encouraging them to seek treatment, so that they are less likely to act on their desires? I mean, what is the best way to treat these children of God if it isn't that? Whatever we are doing now is apparently not helping.
I don't know and don't have any desire to research it.

I do not trust our society NOT to advance from "let's not demonize these people for their sexual orientation" to "let's celebrate these people for their sexual orientation"

Perhaps if this path hadn't already been traveled to normalize some sexual deviancy, I wouldn't be so cynical about it.

Given how many in modern society belittle suggestions of sexual morality as "old-fashioned" and "repressive"; it is not a great stretch to believe that once some subset of our population is identified as having a "sexual orientation" of "Minor Attracted Persons", there will be calls for understanding, and compassion. There will be attempts to provide them some type of "safe" outlet for their "orientation" because self-discipline and abstinence just aren't "reasonable expectations" for us weak humans. After all, "we're nothin' but mammals..."

In a society that valued and supported self-discipline and abstinence, this might be workable. In a society that values doing what "feels good", this is a path to endangering more children.
What society was this? Certainly not any time in America in the 20th century.

Marco Esquandolas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dad-O-Lot said:

Marco Esquandolas said:

Alright so seamaster and dad o lot, do you think pedophilia is somehow a learned behavior or a preference? Is there any amount of scientific and psychological evidence that would convince you that isn't? Let's find out who's really sticking their heads in the sand.

The whole "agenda" here as far as I can tell is that hey maybe shunning and hating these people and forcing them into social isolation is counterproductive to encouraging them to seek treatment, so that they are less likely to act on their desires? I mean, what is the best way to treat these children of God if it isn't that? Whatever we are doing now is apparently not helping.
I don't know and don't have any desire to research it.

I do not trust our society NOT to advance from "let's not demonize these people for their sexual orientation" to "let's celebrate these people for their sexual orientation"

Perhaps if this path hadn't already been traveled to normalize some sexual deviancy, I wouldn't be so cynical about it.

Given how many in modern society belittle suggestions of sexual morality as "old-fashioned" and "repressive"; it is not a great stretch to believe that once some subset of our population is identified as having a "sexual orientation" of "Minor Attracted Persons", there will be calls for understanding, and compassion. There will be attempts to provide them some type of "safe" outlet for their "orientation" because self-discipline and abstinence just aren't "reasonable expectations" for us weak humans. After all, "we're nothin' but mammals..."

In a society that valued and supported self-discipline and abstinence, this might be workable. In a society that values doing what "feels good", this is a path to endangering more children.


Ok so "don't know, don't care," then. Must be a wonderful way to go through life, in a fantasy world inside your own head where you don't have to engage with information or people or learn anything. Some might call it lazy and an abandonment of your god-given faculties of reason, but we know better, amirite?
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sure there was. Only a few decades ago, being a virgin and saving yourself for marriage was valued. Sure, not everyone did it; but those who did were appreciated and lauded. Today they are made fun of.

Promiscuity, although it happened, and may have even been common; it wasn't celebrated to the level it is today.

Infidelity in marriage happened, and may have been common; but it was considered "sad" and those who were unfaithful were villified. Now they are celebrated.

Sexual self-discipline used to be valued; now it is belittled.
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
powerbelly
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dad-O-Lot said:

Sure there was. Only a few decades ago, being a virgin and saving yourself for marriage was valued. Sure, not everyone did it; but those who did were appreciated and lauded. Today they are made fun of.

Promiscuity, although it happened, and may have even been common; it wasn't celebrated to the level it is today.

Infidelity in marriage happened, and may have been common; but it was considered "sad" and those who were unfaithful were villified. Now they are celebrated.

Sexual self-discipline used to be valued; now it is belittled.
You have a big dose of good old days syndrome.
Texaggie7nine
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The problem with your scenario there is that society as a whole would have to devalue the welfare of children in favor of the compassion for those afflicted with that sexual orientation. Do you really think that would happen?

Sure you can point to instances of children being allowed to dress in drag and be somewhat sexualized, or being allowed to permanently chemically alter their bodies because of ways they say they feel about themselves, but in all these cases, it is under the misguided desire to do what is best for the child. Even though you can argue that they are damaging the children by allowing them to do such things, or teaching them such things, they are still doing those things in an effort to do what they think is best for that child.

In the case of adults who desire to have mature romantic relationships with children, I don't see anyone making the argument that allowing them to pursue such relationships is what is best for the children involved. I think society will always side with what is best for the child's welfare in any moral question.

I think many conservative Christians like to cling onto this issue because they think it validates their feelings of how immoral they think homosexuality is because they think they can point to some slippery slope that would allow pedophilia to be ok as well, if homosexuality is deemed "ok". They need to just accept that when it has to do with consenting adults, they are better off to mind their own business and stop judging. You can still have your bible and god and not have to have homosexuality being an abomination.
7nine
Marco Esquandolas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I might add that the biggest most cutting edge system of treatment centers for pedophiles is in a godless degenerate European country. How do you explain that if Germany is on the slippery slope?
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Texaggie7nine said:

The problem with your scenario there is that society as a whole would have to devalue the welfare of children in favor of the compassion for those afflicted with that sexual orientation. Do you really think that would happen?

Sure you can point to instances of children being allowed to dress in drag and be somewhat sexualized, or being allowed to permanently chemically alter their bodies because of ways they say they feel about themselves, but in all these cases, it is under the misguided desire to do what is best for the child. Even though you can argue that they are damaging the children by allowing them to do such things, or teaching them such things, they are still doing those things in an effort to do what they think is best for that child.

In the case of adults who desire to have mature romantic relationships with children, I don't see anyone making the argument that allowing them to pursue such relationships is what is best for the children involved. I think society will always side with what is best for the child's welfare in any moral question.

I think many conservative Christians like to cling onto this issue because they think it validates their feelings of how immoral they think homosexuality is because they think they can point to some slippery slope that would allow pedophilia to be ok as well, if homosexuality is deemed "ok". They need to just accept that when it has to do with consenting adults, they are better off to mind their own business and stop judging. You can still have your bible and god and not have to have homosexuality being an abomination.
Frankly, I hope you're right. I don't trust it though.

Two big things I see as working against the "consenting adults" argument.

1) The age of consent -- this can change and I expect to see more movement by "MAP oriented" people and supporters to lower it.

2) technology -- as technology advances and realistic sex dolls are more widely available, "MAP oriented" people and their supporters will promote child sex dolls as a way for people of this "orientation" to have an outlet. This will only lead to less self-discipline. Instead of being encouraged to abstain, they'll be encouraged to feed their deviance. Of course, calling it "deviant" will become politically incorrect because we can't have people feeling bad about themselves.

As our society loses its sense of shame, there will be more instances of deviancy being normalized. This is only one example.
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
Texaggie7nine
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think society will look at things like that and want to see the research evidence of what results in less actual children being abused. It would seem obvious to me that by treating afflicted people with more dignity and giving them reason to believe that they can seek out treatment without destroying their social lives, we would see more of them seeking out treatment and finding the help they need to abstain from actually abusing children.

If the estimated numbers are correct in how many people there are out there with this sexual orientation, it would be abundantly clear that most of those with that orientation do abstain and do not abuse. So what we need to focus on in addressing those that do. Keeping them in the dark does not help.

As far as the doll stuff and other means for them to gratify their desires, I currently feel we need to legally go after any commercial attempt at providing that means. However, if data were to eventually show without a doubt that by allowing it, it reduces the rates of offenses against actual children, I would rethink it, even though it would make me disgusted to think about it.

You can be disgusted by them all you want, but the pragmatical way to approach this is to side with what brings the best results, not with what makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
7nine
Texaggie7nine
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BTW, whenever this subject is broached in the POL board, the majority of the replies are nothing but caveman type barkings at bad things with no thought behind it.

That is probably the majority of society in how they react to this, and with good reason. It directly affects the most vulnerable people in our society. Videos like the one above ,to me, are brave outreaches in trying to find better solutions for reducing the number of children that are abused in this world even though they are seen as some satanist agenda to normalize the behavior.
7nine
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There is an added danger I see in identifying this as an "orientation".

I believe that there is a spectrum of "orientation" for lack of a better term.

I also believe that for many people, this is something that can be influenced by external events and is not 100% "built-in" from birth.

During a person's lifetime; especially in early adolescence, they may have fleeting attractions of many kinds. In the past, societal taboos discouraged some of these so those who may have had such fleeting attractions would have been pressured to avoid that.

As our society has moved to an "orientation" belief of sexuality, some of these fleeting attractions are identified as "normal" and the taboos have been removed. So, instead of an internal thought of "NOPE"; it becomes "maybe" and perhaps even, "Oh, I guess that is my sexual orientation". Support groups come around and encourage these feelings to become lifestyles.

taboos and shame served a purpose.

Compassion is positive, but it needs to be couched in terms of "you can overcome this" rather than "this is just who you are, let's figure out the best way to deal with it."
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
To add: the woman in the video, and others supporting this identification of "orientation" may have the best of intentions; but there will be some "fringe" group who will push it further. If they develop a strong enough lobby, they will succeed.
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
Marco Esquandolas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dad-O-Lot said:

There is an added danger I see in identifying this as an "orientation".

I believe that there is a spectrum of "orientation" for lack of a better term.

I also believe that for many people, this is something that can be influenced by external events and is not 100% "built-in" from birth.

During a person's lifetime; especially in early adolescence, they may have fleeting attractions of many kinds. In the past, societal taboos discouraged some of these so those who may have had such fleeting attractions would have been pressured to avoid that.

As our society has moved to an "orientation" belief of sexuality, some of these fleeting attractions are identified as "normal" and the taboos have been removed. So, instead of an internal thought of "NOPE"; it becomes "maybe" and perhaps even, "Oh, I guess that is my sexual orientation". Support groups come around and encourage these feelings to become lifestyles.

taboos and shame served a purpose.

Compassion is positive, but it needs to be couched in terms of "you can overcome this" rather than "this is just who you are, let's figure out the best way to deal with it."

Why should we take anything you say seriously? You say things like "I believe that..." based on no evidence of your own, while simultaneously refusing to even consider actual evidence that might contradict the way you imagine reality to be.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Marco Esquandolas said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

There is an added danger I see in identifying this as an "orientation".

I believe that there is a spectrum of "orientation" for lack of a better term.

I also believe that for many people, this is something that can be influenced by external events and is not 100% "built-in" from birth.

During a person's lifetime; especially in early adolescence, they may have fleeting attractions of many kinds. In the past, societal taboos discouraged some of these so those who may have had such fleeting attractions would have been pressured to avoid that.

As our society has moved to an "orientation" belief of sexuality, some of these fleeting attractions are identified as "normal" and the taboos have been removed. So, instead of an internal thought of "NOPE"; it becomes "maybe" and perhaps even, "Oh, I guess that is my sexual orientation". Support groups come around and encourage these feelings to become lifestyles.

taboos and shame served a purpose.

Compassion is positive, but it needs to be couched in terms of "you can overcome this" rather than "this is just who you are, let's figure out the best way to deal with it."

Why should we take anything you say seriously? You say things like "I believe that..." based on no evidence of your own, while simultaneously refusing to even consider actual evidence that might contradict the way you imagine reality to be.
you don't have to. Your choice.

perhaps some time in the future however you may have a reason to think, "Damn that idiot on Texags was right".

I hope not though.
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
Texaggie7nine
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dad-O-Lot said:


During a person's lifetime; especially in early adolescence, they may have fleeting attractions of many kinds. In the past, societal taboos discouraged some of these so those who may have had such fleeting attractions would have been pressured to avoid that.

As our society has moved to an "orientation" belief of sexuality, some of these fleeting attractions are identified as "normal" and the taboos have been removed. So, instead of an internal thought of "NOPE"; it becomes "maybe" and perhaps even, "Oh, I guess that is my sexual orientation". Support groups come around and encourage these feelings to become lifestyles.

taboos and shame served a purpose.

Compassion is positive, but it needs to be couched in terms of "you can overcome this" rather than "this is just who you are, let's figure out the best way to deal with it."
The data seems to make it pretty clear that the bolded things here are just wrong.

I think you are right in that not 100% of homosexuals or pedos are that way because of being orientated that way from the beginning, but I think the vast majority of them are.

The very fact that there are so many homosexuals today that grew up in a time and place where they were a "taboo" and publically shamed shows that it doesn't do any good to do those things, and that in most cases being homosexual is not a choice. The fact that a homosexual, growing up, would have had to constantly fight the fact that they would be seen as a freak and a bad person if anyone in their community knew what desires they had, and yet still turned out to be homosexual shows that no amount of social pressure can change what they are. In the most extreme cases, we see this in the middle east where they are in direct danger of being put to death and they still are found out.

I know many homosexuals who went through the whole denial thing growing up. From forcing themselves to only look at straight porn, to dating the opposite sex and even having sex with the opposite sex. They did everything they could to "force" themselves to be straight because they were afraid of the shame that would come with being gay in their family and community. The taboo and shame worked insofar as making them do everything they could to NOT be homosexual, but it still failed and only succeeded in making them feel like outcasts and pariahs. .

If pedophilia is an orientation, it would make sense that it would be no different.

The fact that homosexuality used to be a taboo and earned so much societal shame is the main reason that we have so much push from LGBT activist types today that want to push their agenda in schools and hollywood. The damage that it did to them growing up made them obsess over forcing society to no longer see it as a taboo and a bad thing and they are going to insane lengths to try to accomplish that.

And I completely get the fear that acknowledging that it could be a true sexual orientation would seem to give more encouragement to the NAMBLAs of the world that would take that and say "see, we told you" and embolden them to fight harder to make it socially acceptable.

Though, when you step back and stop looking at this from a tribalism, team vs team perspective where you don't want to give ANYTHING to the other side and start looking at this pragmatically for the sake of children and willing to accept any data that is proven to be factual and helpful in reducing the numbers of children abused, you start seeing more clearly.

For me, I do not see acknowledging that it can be a sexual orientation, that cannot be changed, giving any more power to the fringe groups that advocate adult/minor relationships. Those groups will always be there, but as I said in my previous post. I think society will always side with what they believe to be the best for the children.
7nine
Post removed:
by user
Frok
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Who on here is an expert on pedophiles? I would imagine all most do is quickly read googled articles to find talking points.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AstroAg17 said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

I don't know and don't have any desire to research it.
Then don't talk about it. You're willfully ignorant about a topic you have a strong position on. That's terrible.
I am speaking based on my observance of our society. I am as much of an "expert" on this as anyone who pays attention.

So because I have never studied sexuality, I have to shut up and listen to my betters?

bull*****

I don't have to get a sociology degree to recognize what is happening in society and to notice a consistent pattern.

"SHUT UP! he explained"
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

I have to shut up and listen to my betters?
Isn't this basically what a ton of posters on another particular board say about athletes and celebrities? Even when said athletes or celebrities speak up when "off the clock"?
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RetiredAg said:

Quote:

I have to shut up and listen to my betters?
Isn't this basically what a ton of posters on another particular board say about athletes and celebrities? Even when said athletes or celebrities speak up when "off the clock"?

I don't know. What does that have to do with anything?

Trying to color me as a hypocrite? guilt by association?

Can you find anywhere where I've posted that celebrities and athletes should "shut up and listen to their betters"?
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not trying to paint you as anything. It was just something I noticed. Take a breath and relax.
Texaggie7nine
How long do you want to ignore this user?
7nine
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
RetiredAg said:

Not trying to paint you as anything. It was just something I noticed. Take a breath and relax.
What am I supposed to think based on your quoting of me and your following statement?

It was a non-sequitur which looked like a not-too-thinly-veiled accusation of hypocrisy.

If I misunderstood your meaning or intention, I apologize.
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
Marco Esquandolas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dad-O-Lot said:

AstroAg17 said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

I don't know and don't have any desire to research it.
Then don't talk about it. You're willfully ignorant about a topic you have a strong position on. That's terrible.
I am speaking based on my observance of our society. I am as much of an "expert" on this as anyone who pays attention.

So because I have never studied sexuality, I have to shut up and listen to my betters?

bull*****

I don't have to get a sociology degree to recognize what is happening in society and to notice a consistent pattern.

"SHUT UP! he explained"

"observance of society" does not count as evidence for a deep biological-psychological issue.

Here is what the rest of us see:

Everyone else: Research indicates that pedophilia is not a learned or chosen behavior. It is more like a sexual orientation that cannot be expunged or overcome. Let's try not ostracizing these people and see if that helps reduce child abuse.

You: I disagree.

Everyone else: Why?

You: My individual life experience and personal biases and opinions (i.e. "my observations of society") trump any and all research and evidence, which I can't be bothered to consider in the first place.

Everyone else: Welp.


Look, none of us are sexologists and none of us need to be to have an informed opinion on this. We all want there to be less child abuse. Therefore I would presume that we are all interested what is the best answer to the question: "how can we decrease child abuse by pedophiles?" Only a few of us stick our fingers in our ears and go "LA LA LA LA I'm a person in the world and I have opinions your science doesn't count" when confronted with evidence-based suggestions that maybe the status quo for how we treat these people could possibly be changed for the better, in service of the goal that we all seem to want. It boils down to "I reject this information categorically because it doesn't fit the internal narrative I've formulated in my head based on my profound understanding of How Society Works that I've gleaned from a lifetime as a white heterosexual Christian American male."

PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:


If I misunderstood your meaning or intention, I apologize.

You did, but no worries.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Marco Esquandolas said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

AstroAg17 said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

I don't know and don't have any desire to research it.
Then don't talk about it. You're willfully ignorant about a topic you have a strong position on. That's terrible.
I am speaking based on my observance of our society. I am as much of an "expert" on this as anyone who pays attention.

So because I have never studied sexuality, I have to shut up and listen to my betters?

bull*****

I don't have to get a sociology degree to recognize what is happening in society and to notice a consistent pattern.

"SHUT UP! he explained"

"observance of society" does not count as evidence for a deep biological-psychological issue.

Here is what the rest of us see:

Everyone else: Research indicates that pedophilia is not a learned or chosen behavior. It is more like a sexual orientation that cannot be expunged or overcome. Let's try not ostracizing these people and see if that helps reduce child abuse.

You: I disagree.

Everyone else: Why?

You: My individual life experience and personal biases and opinions (i.e. "my observations of society") trump any and all research and evidence, which I can't be bothered to consider in the first place.

Everyone else: Welp.


Look, none of us are sexologists and none of us need to be to have an informed opinion on this. We all want there to be less child abuse. Therefore I would presume that we are all interested what is the best answer to the question: "how can we decrease child abuse by pedophiles?" Only a few of us stick our fingers in our ears and go "LA LA LA LA I'm a person in the world and I have opinions your science doesn't count" when confronted with evidence-based suggestions that maybe the status quo for how we treat these people could possibly be changed for the better, in service of the goal that we all seem to want. It boils down to "I reject this information categorically because it doesn't fit the internal narrative I've formulated in my head based on my profound understanding of How Society Works that I've gleaned from a lifetime as a white heterosexual Christian American male."


My response regarding whether being attracted to minors is a sexual orientation or not has been "I don't know". Never "I disagree".

My comments all along have been about how this will advance in society and what I expect to see as this "evolves".
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
Rocag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't see any major changes happening in terms of the acceptance of pedophilia. The key issue is and has long been consent. That holds true here because pretty much everyone believes children are incapable of understanding the consequences of their actions and therefore can not provide consent. The only change I could perhaps see happening is questioning what that age of consent should be. As in when do we think people are adults capable of making decisions for themselves? 18? Younger? That's a valid topic.
Beer Baron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think it has less to do with their actual thoughts and opinions on pedopilia than it does with their opinions on homosexuality. All this discussion is for them is a way to group the latter into the same box as the former and write "perverts" in sharpie across the top.
Marco Esquandolas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Beer Baron said:

I think it has less to do with their actual thoughts and opinions on pedopilia than it does with their opinions on homosexuality. All this discussion is for them is a way to group the latter into the same box as the former and write "perverts" in sharpie across the top.

That is clearly the sub-text here.
Marco Esquandolas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dad-O-Lot said:

Marco Esquandolas said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

AstroAg17 said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

I don't know and don't have any desire to research it.
Then don't talk about it. You're willfully ignorant about a topic you have a strong position on. That's terrible.
I am speaking based on my observance of our society. I am as much of an "expert" on this as anyone who pays attention.

So because I have never studied sexuality, I have to shut up and listen to my betters?

bull*****

I don't have to get a sociology degree to recognize what is happening in society and to notice a consistent pattern.

"SHUT UP! he explained"

"observance of society" does not count as evidence for a deep biological-psychological issue.

Here is what the rest of us see:

Everyone else: Research indicates that pedophilia is not a learned or chosen behavior. It is more like a sexual orientation that cannot be expunged or overcome. Let's try not ostracizing these people and see if that helps reduce child abuse.

You: I disagree.

Everyone else: Why?

You: My individual life experience and personal biases and opinions (i.e. "my observations of society") trump any and all research and evidence, which I can't be bothered to consider in the first place.

Everyone else: Welp.


Look, none of us are sexologists and none of us need to be to have an informed opinion on this. We all want there to be less child abuse. Therefore I would presume that we are all interested what is the best answer to the question: "how can we decrease child abuse by pedophiles?" Only a few of us stick our fingers in our ears and go "LA LA LA LA I'm a person in the world and I have opinions your science doesn't count" when confronted with evidence-based suggestions that maybe the status quo for how we treat these people could possibly be changed for the better, in service of the goal that we all seem to want. It boils down to "I reject this information categorically because it doesn't fit the internal narrative I've formulated in my head based on my profound understanding of How Society Works that I've gleaned from a lifetime as a white heterosexual Christian American male."


My response regarding whether being attracted to minors is a sexual orientation or not has been "I don't know". Never "I disagree".

My comments all along have been about how this will advance in society and what I expect to see as this "evolves".

How do you square that with what I read to be your concern that treating it as a sexual orientation normalizes it and ushers in the downfall of society? If it really doesn't matter to you whether it's a "disorder" or an "orientation" then why weigh in at all?
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Marco Esquandolas said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

Marco Esquandolas said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

AstroAg17 said:

Dad-O-Lot said:

I don't know and don't have any desire to research it.
Then don't talk about it. You're willfully ignorant about a topic you have a strong position on. That's terrible.
I am speaking based on my observance of our society. I am as much of an "expert" on this as anyone who pays attention.

So because I have never studied sexuality, I have to shut up and listen to my betters?

bull*****

I don't have to get a sociology degree to recognize what is happening in society and to notice a consistent pattern.

"SHUT UP! he explained"

"observance of society" does not count as evidence for a deep biological-psychological issue.

Here is what the rest of us see:

Everyone else: Research indicates that pedophilia is not a learned or chosen behavior. It is more like a sexual orientation that cannot be expunged or overcome. Let's try not ostracizing these people and see if that helps reduce child abuse.

You: I disagree.

Everyone else: Why?

You: My individual life experience and personal biases and opinions (i.e. "my observations of society") trump any and all research and evidence, which I can't be bothered to consider in the first place.

Everyone else: Welp.


Look, none of us are sexologists and none of us need to be to have an informed opinion on this. We all want there to be less child abuse. Therefore I would presume that we are all interested what is the best answer to the question: "how can we decrease child abuse by pedophiles?" Only a few of us stick our fingers in our ears and go "LA LA LA LA I'm a person in the world and I have opinions your science doesn't count" when confronted with evidence-based suggestions that maybe the status quo for how we treat these people could possibly be changed for the better, in service of the goal that we all seem to want. It boils down to "I reject this information categorically because it doesn't fit the internal narrative I've formulated in my head based on my profound understanding of How Society Works that I've gleaned from a lifetime as a white heterosexual Christian American male."


My response regarding whether being attracted to minors is a sexual orientation or not has been "I don't know". Never "I disagree".

My comments all along have been about how this will advance in society and what I expect to see as this "evolves".

How do you square that with what I read to be your concern that treating it as a sexual orientation normalizes it and ushers in the downfall of society? If it really doesn't matter to you whether it's a "disorder" or an "orientation" then why weigh in at all?
I have no control over what society, or science, or NAMBLA or anyone else call an attraction to a pre-pubescent child.

Words mean things though. If "pedophile" becomes "Minor Attracted Person", that invariably brings with it a different level of understanding and even a certain level of sympathy from more people.

Now this person goes from being a pervert, to being a victim.

Also, considering how defense lawyers and mental professionals work, this will become an attempted defense for someone who has had sex with a minor. "Studies" will be used to justify some lower level of punishment.

The waters become further muddied when considering pubescent victims. 12 year old or older girls who are physically mature enough to bear children. Are men who are attracted to them "MAPs" or just Perverted men who can't relate to adult women?

I have no interest in studying the "science" of sexual attraction; but I have seen what happens when a "disorder" becomes an "orientation"
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
Dad-O-Lot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think I'll disengage here.
People of integrity expect to be believed, when they're not, they let time prove them right.
Texaggie7nine
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So your concern is with possible issues with the law punishing abusers as extremely as they can now, whereas we are more concerned with stopping their victims from being abused in the first place.
7nine
Marco Esquandolas
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Texaggie7nine said:

So your concern is with possible issues with the law punishing abusers as extremely as they can now, whereas we are more concerned with stopping their victims from being abused in the first place.

Yeah I guess I was mistaken in assuming we are all primarily concerned with how to reduce child abuse.

His position is incoherent. It doesn't matter (I don't care about clinical evidence), but it does matter (calling it anything other than "pervert" based on what we currently know is clearly unacceptable). There seems to be an unstated assumption that the "MAP" designation is purely political, though that is pure conjecture.

IMO if all of society shared this mentality, the problem would get likely get worse instead of better. We still have no positive statement on what to do instead of what he woman in the video proposed.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.