`"Paedophilic interest is natural and normal for human males,” said the presentation. “At least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children … Normal males are aroused by children.”
Some yellowing tract from the Seventies or early Eighties, era of abusive celebrities and the infamous PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange? No. Anonymous commenters on some underground website? No again.
The statement that paedophilia is “natural and normal” was made not three decades ago but last July. It was made not in private but as one of the central claims of an academic presentation delivered, at the invitation of the organisers, to many of the key experts in the field at a conference held by the University of Cambridge. - 'Paedophilia is natural and normal for males' - Telegraph
`
`
`
This is just so wrong, on so many levels, it makes me angry. Still, should this subject be part of pro-active academic discourse?
`
`
`
This is just so wrong, on so many levels, it makes me angry. Still, should this subject be part of pro-active academic discourse?
`
`
`
This is just so wrong, on so many levels, it makes me angry. Still, should this subject be part of pro-active academic discourse?
Not good, but I see no cause to be surprised or shocked by it, given the way our society is increasingly accepting sexual depravity in whatever form it may take. A generation ago, it would have been equally disturbing to see similar defense of homosexuality. A generation from now, with pedophilia being accepted as homosexuality now is, I wonder what will be seen as similarly disturbing.
This is the natural result of homosexual perversions being accepted.
Congratulations!
This thread went 9 posts without linking homosexuality and paedophilia
Really?
So no heterosexual paedophiles out there eh? No such thing as heterosexual perversion, right? Or are heterosexual perversions ok in your book?
`
`
`
This is just so wrong, on so many levels, it makes me angry. Still, should this subject be part of pro-active academic discourse?
Maybe this is a dumb question but if homosexuality is normal and natural then why would pedophilia be any different? I mean, seriously, there have been pedophiles forever in every culture and it sure as hell seems they're born that way instead of "turned" and it doesn't seem to be curable so it's not like it's a disease.....right?
Just sayin'.
This is the natural result of homosexual perversions being accepted.
Maybe this is a dumb question but if homosexuality is normal and natural then why would pedophilia be any different? I mean, seriously, there have been pedophiles forever in every culture and it sure as hell seems they're born that way instead of "turned" and it doesn't seem to be curable so it's not like it's a disease.....right?
Just sayin'.
This is the natural result of homosexual perversions being accepted.
Congratulations!
This thread went 5 whole posts without a reference to homosexuality.
Homosexuality can be between consenting adults. It is none of our business of it is between consenting adults.
Paedophilia, on the other hand, is never between consenting adults. That makes it our business as it is, imho, our job to protect children from the harm others would do to them.
Arguments like this completely miss the boat. First of all it's false, but it doesn't even matter that it's false. Even if it were "normal" or "natural" that still wouldn't make it ok. Just because humans have evolved an urge to do something doesn't make it ok.
This makes one wonder.
So far as I know, the most generous estimates suggest that as much as 10% of the population may have homosexual inclinations. More realistically, it's probably closer to 1% or 2% or so.
This article claims that “At least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children”. “A sizeable minority” is a rather vague estimate; less than half, but certainly more than the 1% or 2% or even 10% that are homosexual.
So,if this article is to be believed, an inclination toward pedophilia is more prevalent than an inclination toward homosexuality.
Well, it's the result of the general decay of sexual morality in a society. Homosexuality is one form of immorality that is coming to be accepted, after premarital sex; as a stepping stone toward increasing tolerance of other forms of immorality yet to come. It appears that pedophilia may be one of the next such steps. Really, none of this is about any individual form of immorality, but the bigger picture of overall moral decay.
Arguments like this completely miss the boat. First of all it's false, but it doesn't even matter that it's false. Even if it were "normal" or "natural" that still wouldn't make it ok. Just because humans have evolved an urge to do something doesn't make it ok.
`It is an assertion that has been made in academia and by certain public advocacy groups in the past. That much is true regardless of the article's accuracy.
However, I will grant you that it is suspicious that the article does not provide any sources for it's claims. I also haven't found any reference to the conference on google other than the Telegraph article.
In any case, I'm sure the story will be shortly debunked if it was legitimately fabricated or exaggerated.
It is worth noting that both of these arguments ultimately rely on subjective value judgments, and the weight of popular opinion being behind them.
There's no guarantee that this will always be the case.
Some of us are tempted toward pedophilia.
Others toward homosexuality.
Others toward stealing, or violence or fraud.
`I am going to guess quotes out of context. Hard to know for sure without having a transcript. Also would like to know more about the event itself. I suspect it is not as your editorial source presents it. PROTIP: never, ever, trust editorials.
No, I contend that ****ing children is objectively wrong. Society may not always agree with that, but that would be irrelevant. My view is that the wrongness of it is objective, it's not dependent in any way on how society views it. If society changes in the future to accept that ****ing children is ok, then society would be mistaken.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?