• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

@LibsofTikTok

Lloyd Christmas said:
ONe person makes a tic toc, how is that liberalism is dying on it? This is not a big liberal platform its one person making a tik tok and of course right wing POS who have no fact, no logic, no reasoning have to run with the lie

Typical dishonest bullshit
Click to expand...

You telling us this has never come up before? You cannot be that naive.
 
Michael Cole said:
Perhaps, but all minor attracted people are not pedophiles. This distinction is important from a scientific, moral and legal standpoint.

MAP is an umbrella or all-encompassing term used to signify or delineate specific age's of attractions.

  • A pedophile is an individual attracted to a pre-pubescent child;
  • A hebephile is an individual attracted to a pubescent child (11-14) and;
  • An ephebophile is an individual attracted to a post-pubescent child (i.e., a teen, 15-19)

Minor Attracted Person vs. Pedophile vs. Sex Offender — The Global Prevention Project

‘Minor attracted person’ or MAP is a widely acknowledged term used in the global Sex Offender Research and Sex Offender Treatment Community. To reiterate, this is not a term we invented, NOR is it a term used to rebrand pedophiles OR link them to the LGBTQ community. MAP i
theglobalpreventionproject.org theglobalpreventionproject.org
Click to expand...

OK, but are all pedophiles MAPs? It seems to be a stretch to assert that someone would elect to have sex with someone that they are not sexually attracted to.
 
Lloyd Christmas said:
Yup, you can't help who or what you are attracted to, just like many rednecks can't help being attracted to livestock.
Click to expand...
:LOL:
Lloyd Christmas said:
And I'm sure there are many people out there that are attracted to pre pubescent kids but do not do anything because they know its wrong. How many people who are MAP tell others they are that they are being stigmitized? YOu would think you would keep that quiet and nobody would know since you don't act out on it

Attraction is biological, and any kid that has gone through puberty and is able to have kids, will become attractive to others, even older. Of course, its wrong for adults to have sex with minors but having an attraction is not wrong since it is biology and attraction is all about that and the animal desire to procreate.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Child brides, brother and sister marriages, polygamy - all prevalent in current and ancient cultures.

king-tutankhamen-with-his-wife-sister-everett.jpg

Tutankhamen with his wife/half-sister Ankhesenamun. He was 10 and she 8 when they married.


image-placeholder-title.jpg

Mormon family.

In Medieval England, the age of consent was 10 and 12. The world is/was very different than what we understand as normal. Our genetics are exactly the same, though. It's these complex issues that frighten rightwingers.
 
Lloyd Christmas said:
Why is there a special name for someone attracted to post pubescent child? That is everybodyy, because biologically once a kid develops to be able to reproduce, they become attractive to others. The only wrong thing about it is acting on it
Click to expand...
Don't know. Those who study it do, I'm sure.

It may be someone who is attracted only to post-pubescent minors. I dunno. A 60 year old who is attracted only to 16 year olds would have a problem, I'd assume. Though sex would be perfectly legal in this state.
 
Michael Cole said:
Yes. It's not about acting on the attraction. It's the attraction itself.
Click to expand...

I agree, yet it is not hard to understand that (most?) parents would object to having other adults, especially those who are MAPs, discussing sexual matters with their K-3 children.
 
NatMorton said:
I think you should care about the quality of education in our public school system, yes. I also think you should worry about people who do not see a problem with sexually assaulting children.

Am I asking too much of you?
Click to expand...
If you're asking me to look at TikToc, yes.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I agree, yet it is not hard to understand that (most?) parents would object to having other adults, especially those who are MAPs, discussing sexual matters with their K-3 children.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Is this being done?

I'm good with old school "never talk to strangers" for toddlers and slowly working into explaining reality in age-appropriate manners as children grow. It should be done at home but I have no problem with schools discussing sexual predation at the appropriate times.
 
Michael Cole said:
Perhaps, but all minor attracted people are not pedophiles. This distinction is important from a scientific, moral and legal standpoint.

MAP is an umbrella or all-encompassing term used to signify or delineate specific age's of attractions.

  • A pedophile is an individual attracted to a pre-pubescent child;
  • A hebephile is an individual attracted to a pubescent child (11-14) and;
  • An ephebophile is an individual attracted to a post-pubescent child (i.e., a teen, 15-19)

Minor Attracted Person vs. Pedophile vs. Sex Offender — The Global Prevention Project

‘Minor attracted person’ or MAP is a widely acknowledged term used in the global Sex Offender Research and Sex Offender Treatment Community. To reiterate, this is not a term we invented, NOR is it a term used to rebrand pedophiles OR link them to the LGBTQ community. MAP i
theglobalpreventionproject.org theglobalpreventionproject.org
Click to expand...
The terminology doesn’t matter. The attempt to remove stigma does. So, do you think the social stigma should be removed from either the desire to, or the act of, sexually molesting children?

For clarity’s sake, I do not.
 
How ideologically rigid is the far left? Look at this thread. They’d rather side with soft-on-pedophilia commentary than agree with conservatives on anything.
 
NatMorton said:
How ideologically rigid is the far left? Look at this thread. They’d rather side with soft-on-pedophilia commentary than agree with conservatives on anything.
Click to expand...
Only the simple minded think research to PREVENT sexual assault of children is “soft-on-pedophilia”.

It’s like some people would rather we remain ignorant of ways to treat people with pedophilia.
 
NatMorton said:
I think the professor is attempting to destigmatize pedophillia. Why he/she is doing it is anyone's guess.

BTW, is this you acknowledging your statement is post 23 was a straw-man? It's not always easy to tell when you're conceding a point.
Click to expand...

Actually one could make a case that all these false accusations from the right will be the thing that destigmatizes pedophilia.

Rational people do NOT take kindly to seeing those kinds of false accusations.
 
Michael Cole said:
Why do you think that? Wouldn't you first investigate a little? Read this. Just as I thought.

MAP Starting Guide | IPCE

www.ipce.info www.ipce.info

It's a phenomenon. All MAP are not pedophiles, and the condition is attraction to minors, not sex with minors. It's a very broad description, which can be arbitrary when viewed legally.

“Minor-attracted person” ["MAP"] is anyone with a romantic or sexual interest in people who have not yet reached the age of consent.

The age of consent varies by state.

No one claims this is normal. It is reality. What the asst. prof. is attempting is removal of the stigma attached to all such people. Call them afflicted if you want.

The article mentions culture, and I'll add era. In 1850 Kentucky, 15, married and pregnant was normal. Were 1850 Kentuckians pedophiles?
Click to expand...

And in 2022, the Republican legislature of Tennessee is attempting to legalize child marriage.

Methinks the Right is protesting too much.
 
BlueTex said:
Only the simple minded think research to PREVENT sexual assault of children is “soft-on-pedophilia”.

It’s like some people would rather we remain ignorant of ways to treat people with pedophilia.
Click to expand...
Probably because they project, they are the ones molesting kids, they are the one grooming kids to be moronic, racist, bigoted people like them
Phys251 said:
Actually one could make a case that all these false accusations from the right will be the thing that destigmatizes pedophilia.

Rational people do NOT take kindly to seeing those kinds of false accusations.
Click to expand...

Yup, boy who cried wolf. They really are the dumbest of the dumb that push this shit and respond to such obvious lies and nonsense from Republican politicians, who have no plans to do anything other than continue to rob this country blind while duping morons
 
Lloyd Christmas said:
Probably because they project, they are the ones molesting kids, they are the one grooming kids to be moronic, racist, bigoted people like them


Yup, boy who cried wolf. They really are the dumbest of the dumb that push this shit and respond to such obvious lies and nonsense from Republican politicians, who have no plans to do anything other than continue to rob this country blind while duping morons
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that there is a small minority of people who are pedophiles and are pushing this shit to keep the heat off themselves. That, and to make sure that their kids never go and tell anyone.

It's like the game Mafia where the mafia almost never push for the mislynch, but they almost always join in on it once the bandwagon grows.
 
CaughtInThe said:
Of course not. Are you overlooking the numerous examples of actual pedophilia…


"In 2015, former Rep. Dennis Hastert, the longest-ever serving Republican speaker of the House, pleaded guilty to making illegal hush-money payments in order to cover up his history of sexually abusing high school wrestlers he had coached decades before.

“Nothing is more stunning than having ‘serial child molester’ and ‘speaker of the House’ in the same sentence,” the judge said at his sentencing."
Click to expand...

Josie won't hold her own, right-wing side accountable. Ever.
 
Michael Cole said:
Don't know. Those who study it do, I'm sure.

It may be someone who is attracted only to post-pubescent minors. I dunno. A 60 year old who is attracted only to 16 year olds would have a problem, I'd assume. Though sex would be perfectly legal in this state.
Click to expand...

I’m confident that he could run for office in GQP and win..
 
Who cares
 
The next time you come across an OP that poses a problem that our friends on the left have difficulty explaining away, count how many of them take the time and effort to reply with something like:
  • Why is this important?
  • Who cares?
  • What exactly is this supposed to mean?
  • Is this a crime?
  • What?
  • Where?

I think we should call this their "Vinnie Barbarino strategy."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom