Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[DreamerGhost]

LW, do you think pedophile choose to be attracted to children? If someone do feel attracted to children but keeps his urges in check, why should we condemn it? He literally did nothing wrong!

If they could keep control and thought they were able, nobody would know they were pedofiles.

[Zangi]

LW, do you think pedophile choose to be attracted to children? If someone do feel attracted to children but keeps his urges in check, why should we condemn it? He literally did nothing wrong!

If they could keep control and thought they were able, nobody would know they were pedofiles.

Wouldn't they be in jail then?  Or at the least, court or with some sort of court record.

[Grim Portent]

LW, do you think pedophile choose to be attracted to children? If someone do feel attracted to children but keeps his urges in check, why should we condemn it? He literally did nothing wrong!

If they could keep control and thought they were able, nobody would know they were pedofiles.

Unless they choose to discuss their urges with people.

[Sheb]

Like, if they're trying to get help to overcome them.

[Zangi]

Oh right, there is the sex offender list too.  16-18 year olds getting on that.  Wouldn't be too farfetched for some people to want thought crime to get on that too I reckon.
Justice

[hector13]

Oh right, there is the sex offender list too.  16-18 year olds getting on that.  Wouldn't be too farfetched for some people to want thought crime to get on that too I reckon.
Justice

Some people believe that the thought is the same as the action.

I'm not one of those people though. That's a stupid idea. There is such a thing as control.

[wierd]

I wont weigh in here either way.

what i will do instead, is ask about a glaring double standard:


Most of the people saying that the pedophile can exercise such control, claim that teenagers cannot. If abstainance only sex ed fails because the sexual impulse is just too strong, how can the same message apply to pedophiles who must always remain abstainant to stay legal? After all, the pedo is a teenager at some point themselves.

Food for thought, no?

[hector13]

Does the abstinence thing also preach against masturbation? 'cause you don't need to have sex to get your rocks off.

Sex is a biological need (for most) so it's something that needs to be addressed. Obviously a paedophile masturbating to child abuse isn't really controlling anything (indirect abuse) but they don't necessarily have to watch anything to keep their urges in check.

[wierd]

nope. spanking the monkey and groovin to the jelly bean are just fine in abstainence only sex ed.

but the numbers show that it does not work.

[Sheb]

Most of the people saying that the pedophile can exercise such control, claim that teenagers cannot. If abstainance only sex ed fails because the sexual impulse is just too strong, how can the same message apply to pedophiles who must always remain abstainant to stay legal? After all, the pedo is a teenager at some point themselves.

1) You're comparing average with individuals. If 10% of teens ignore sex ed and do stupid thing, the program is a failure, even if 90% of people can control themselves.

2) What exactly are you suggesting? Jailing people who have never done anything? If anything, you're going to prevent pedophiles from getting help.

[wierd]

Most of the people saying that the pedophile can exercise such control, claim that teenagers cannot. If abstainance only sex ed fails because the sexual impulse is just too strong, how can the same message apply to pedophiles who must always remain abstainant to stay legal? After all, the pedo is a teenager at some point themselves.

1) You're comparing average with individuals. If 10% of teens ignore sex ed and do stupid thing, the program is a failure, even if 90% of people can control themselves.

2) What exactly are you suggesting? Jailing people who have never done anything? If anything, you're going to prevent pedophiles from getting help.

1) so are you.  if 10% of pedophiles ignore the law, and do a stupid thing like abuse a child, then the program is a failure, even if a large number are able to purpetually restrain themselves. (being sexually abused as a child strongly correlates with abusing children in adult life later. the goal is to stop this cycle.)

2) I am not suggesting anything. As I said, i wont weigh in either way. I was just pointing out an unpleasant logical inconsistency with the position others have taken.

[hector13]

nope. spanking the monkey and groovin to the jelly bean are just fine in abstainence only sex ed.

but the numbers show that it does not work.

What numbers?

[wierd]

The ones presented to the department of health and human services.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Sex/story?id=3048738&page=1

[Sheb]

As I said, i wont weigh in either way. I was just pointing out an unpleasant logical inconsistency with the position others have taken.

There is no such logical inconsistency, because no one proposed abstinence-based sex ed as the only too to prevent sexual abuse of children. There is just a bunch of us saying that a pedophile that hasn't actually acted isn't acutally doing anything wrong, and LW who is saying that we are defending children-fucking.

[mainiac]

Food for thought, no?

I'm gonna go with no it is not food for thought.  It's an argument through false analogy.  Because people X make mistake A, you argue that it's inevitable that people Y will make mistake B.  Well for any group Z and mistake C that would be equally valid.  So all drivers are murders because we dont know they wont drive drunk and kill someone.  All husbands are wife beaters because we dont know they wont get angry and become abusive.