- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 156,720
- Reaction score
- 53,497
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Please look at a dictionary---not an occult science organization.
Sounds deviant to me.
"Deviant behavior may refer to
Deviance (sociology), actions or behaviors that violate social norms"
Deviant behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So you think the Mormons here in the US that were marrying 12 year old girls should not be in prison I guess.
Sexual orientation is another Lib-Com buzz word.
The APA said pedophilia was a sexual orientation one day, and said it wasn't the next. So not even the APA can agree on what sexaul orientation even encompasses.
Sell your snake oil to someone else.
You still haven't given the hard figures on what percentage of pedophillic victims are boys and what percent girls.
As I go by the common English lanuguage, ANY male on boy sexual act would automatically make the aggressor a homosexual.
I do not, and will not buy your political sentiments that males who rape boys are not actual homosexuals. This is done for a pure political agenda of promoting homosexuality and for the decriminalization of pedophillic acts.
A person can have homosexual desires or thoughts or impulses---but that does not make them a bona-fide homosexual under they physically undertake the act.
Why is homosexuality protected by the government, but pedophilia isn't?
Why is homosexuality protected by the government, but pedophilia isn't?
You're kidding, right?
I would not rule out that the young boys may want to be inseminated. I don't know enough to provide more details. I do know that many people enjoy performing oral sex. The context is the important factor, including the cultural influences. The point is that individuals and cultures can interpret the same activities quite differently depending on how they frame it. For example, some people hate being spanked or being penetrated anally and consider it painful while others love it and do not consider those activities painful at all. It is a mistake to assume that everyone feels the same about the things they experience that you, or most other people, do.
Is there any evidence that this practice is harmful? Both the benefit and the harm are going to be rather subjective. Looking back at spanking there are those who would claim that the harm outweighs the benefit while others will claim the opposite. Some will even claim that there is no benefit or no harm. Simply because we see it as harmful, is it really? What long term detriment can you show that is directly linked to this practice? Part of the issue of consent (which is what started this small tangent) is whether or not the "child" is mature enough to actually give that consent. In ages past, humans were considered adults at a much younger age. Because of their environment they had to mature a lot faster than we did. (there is also a theory out there somewhere that because we are longer lived we are also taking longer to mature.) We now have the luxury, at least in 1st and even 2nd world countries, to take longer to "grow up". So ultimately what we consider "pedophilia" isn't really so in other countries.
Now granted we don't really have a way to test this, but here is a thought experiment for you (the general you and not Chromium specifically). If you've seen "Interview with a Vampire" or you have read the "Fables" comic/graphic novel series, you are probably familiar with the concept of someone who lives for a long time and matures, but never physically grows beyond childhood. I think it was also touched upon in the Highlander TV series. So the question is, once the pedophile realizes the actual maturity of the "child", would they lose interest in them? What is the actual attraction?
Oh look, the law now says that a person becomes an adult at age 10. Now what? Face it, the law does not necessarily reflect reality. Sometimes that is because a factor that we are trying to legislate for is widely variable and we have to draw the line somewhere, as you said. However, we far too often make that a hard line and not the rule of thumb and instead look to see if the intent was actually violated or not. A person does not magically change between the day before and the day of their 18th birthday. Yet if a 40 YO were to have sex with the 18 year old, it's all well and good. But if it happened the day before, somehow the 40 YO is causing trauma to the 17 YO? If the individual has the maturity that we see out of the average 18 year old, then it shouldn't matter if they are younger than 18. Because that is what we are legislating about, the "child's" maturity, or lack thereof.
But we are saying that pedophilia the disorder, as long as it has not be acted upon, should be de-stigmatized. A point that some people can't seem to comprehend.
Unfortunately, he isn't. He posted something similar in another thread, wondering why homosexuality is protected by the government, but hockey players aren't.
Homosexuality harms no one. Pedophilia harms children. Don't you know that?
Yes and they used to hang 7 year olds for theft, doesn't mean a 7 year old in 1300s was the equivalent of an adult today in psychological terms. It just means those cultures were barbaric and didn't know a damn thing about crime deterrence. Sorry but relativity doesn't extend to nonconsensual sex and murder in my worldview.
The Claudia character was interesting...I suppose there could be emotional attraction and not just physical, similar to other orientations, i don't know.
You don't need to convince me of this, but keep in mind that legislation also revolves around convenience. We don't have a means to measure maturity level scientifically, or consent for that matter, so the law is intended to draw a clear boundary that everyone *is aware of* so hopefully they don't break that law.
At the same time, i'm in agreement especially when it comes to sentencing that there needs to be room for common sense. As you say, a 40 year with 18 year old is likely not less coercive or traumatic than 19 with 17 year old.
Agreed, they should be able to talk of their feelings without fearing pitchforks or being locked in some mental hospital. It wouldn't surprise me either if this reduced the # of victims
Not because of being gay. Because of the stigma from others about being gay and because of discrimination of being gay. Research has demonstrated that the level of acceptance is the major player in gay suicide rates.
Social norms are formed by the majority of folks in a society. Currently, the majority of folks in the US have no issue with homosexuality. Therefore, it is not deviant behavior.
Do we live in a Mormon society?
Gays are 2% of society so it qualifies as deviant behavior. It is not the social norm.
Why is homosexuality protected by the government, but pedophilia isn't?
One causes harm to a vulnerable person, the other doesn't.
You realize this is the exact argument used by many pedophiles right, that the kid wanted it
A 7 year old is not capable of consenting to sex, particularly when there are cultural/religious taboos against refusing and oh yeah, they're half the size of the adult so have no way of refusing.
So let me get this straight: everything you see around you that is in the "minority" is deviant?
Two percent of America is gay and that meets the definition of deviant behavior
So let me get this straight: everything you see around you that is in the "minority" is deviant?
Technically, historically, "deviant" only means different from the norm. No negative connotation whatsoever. It has only begun to take on a negative connotation in something of a slang aspect in the last two to three decades.
A good example of how languages evolve, you could say.
In the discussion you were having, I believe the other person was being purposely and disingenuously obtuse.I know, but he was using a particularly derogatory word for "outside of the norm," and was applying it to homosexuality on the basis of it being in the minority. So I'm curious if he would be just as ready to use "deviant" as his go-to choice for, say, left handedness, not liking apple pie or hating Game of Thrones (actually I would opt for "deviant" on that last one).
You claimed being gay causes no distress and I proved you wrong, get over it.
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?