Quote# 137730

Now, the crux of the matter is what is 'legal' and what is not. It's not been too long since homosexuality has been broadly made legal across the world, it's still against the law in some places and I think we can see now that thinking homosexuality should be 'illegal' is madness. I suppose the reason pedophilia (or rather it's relating activities) is deemed illegal are because it must involve children, and it's harmful to children. But I would like to tentatively posit the idea that it doesn't have to be necessarily harmful and that it's the very fact that pedophilia is illegal and despised by society that makes it so harmful.

In a similar fashion to how the criminalization of recreational drugs magnifies their harm, if someone is to find satisfaction with regards to pedophilic urges they are going to have to break the law, be secretive use threats or violence, in other words, be harmful. I think if pedophilia was to be decriminalized, folk like yourself, who have a natural sexual orientation towards children might get a chance to explore that in a more open and less harmful way. Pornography involving children doesn't have to be seedy abuse and extortion, it could be fair and accountable, regulated and operated according to welfare laws.



[deleted], reddit 18 Comments [4/15/2018 11:24:54 AM]
Fundie Index: 14

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 | bottom

Malingspann

Member of a child-rescuing Underground Railroad in a future world where age of consent has been abolished, making pedophile activities legal: "The law changed! Children didn't!"

4/15/2018 11:30:41 AM

Anon-e-moose

No wonder you were deleted.

I trust Reddit's mods, admins etc reported you to the authorities, OP.

4/15/2018 11:32:50 AM

Skide

"Pornography involving children doesn't have to be seedy abuse and extortion, it could be fair and accountable, regulated and operated according to welfare laws."

It literally can`t be and that`s by definition alone. Go choke on a dick, pedo scum.

4/15/2018 12:23:36 PM

Kanna

You may have " a natural sexual orientation towards children", but children can not give you permission, in either a legal, an intellectual, or an emotional sense. In other words, your desires are just SOL, because there isn't a way to fulfill those desires that doesn't break the responsibilities we have toward the care of children.

4/15/2018 1:53:55 PM

Citizen Justin

This quote confirmed my suspicions that in order to be deleted from Reddit you really do have to be the scum of the earth.

4/15/2018 2:25:37 PM

Keith

Yeah, there's just that whole consent problem, darn it.
Makes it rape no matter whether society tolerates your desires OR demonizes them. Shucks darn, and die in a fire, buddy.

4/15/2018 2:26:19 PM

Quasirodent

I feel a certain amount of pity for people who have sexual attractions to targets that can't consent, because they didn't ask to be that way, it's a neurological problem they have no control over. I have disabilities that that make my life harder and which I can't cure myself of, but I can choose to not just sit on my ass and whine about how unfair it is that I have these extra challenges.
Having attraction to children must suck, and it's not fair, but life has no obligation to be fair. Our society could do more to help, granted, but if you're allowing yourself to be a danger to others, I don't feel sorry for you anymore.

4/15/2018 2:50:07 PM



This is why I'm conflicted about fictionalized child porn, for example shotacon or lolicon anime, or written erotica. It's obviously not a real child, and no child was harmed during the creation of the work. It allows those with sexual attraction to children an outlet that doesn't involve hurting real kids... but on the other hand, it also allows them to continue to get off thinking about having sex with kids, which is disgusting to me.

4/15/2018 5:33:21 PM

The Angry Dybbuk

The OP’s argument adds fuel to claims, as made by opponents of equal rights for sexual minorities, that…

…homosexuality and pedophilia are merely two points on the same spectrum

…people and organisations that recognise homosexuals have rights equal to those of heterosexuals are (either unwittingly or knowingly) following some nefarious agenda to legalise and normalise sex crimes against children for the benefit of child molesters

There are too many people who actually believe that bullshit without the addition of rape-apologist giving them ammunition. Both groups should be called out so their arguments can be examined and dismantled with prejudice. (Seeing an influx of these arguments here, I've released a couple of teal deers before and plan to do so again. It takes a certain number of words to adequately address their claims.)

The OP fails to recognise the most important issue here is consent.

The Canadian Department of Justice defines consent in part as, “…voluntary agreement of the complainant to engage in the sexual activity in question. Conduct short of a voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity does not constitute consent as a matter of law.”

A person cannot provide voluntary agreement to sexual acts if, for example, “…the complainant is incapable of consenting to the activity” (which persons under the age of consent cannot legally do, full stop); or, “…where the accused induces the complainant to engage in the activity by abusing a position of trust, power or authority.”

Sexual interference with a minor, and every wrung ‘above’ that on the ladder of sexual misconduct targeting children, must remain illegal.

Predatory behaviour toward children, no matter how the disordered individual doing it dresses the matter up, is a violation of the child's rights as recognised by laws native to specific countries and by a wider international community.

The Government of Canada, for example, has ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The Government of the United States helped draft the Convention and has signed it, but has yet to ratify (in part over concerns related to national sovereignty).

Convention on the Rights of the Child

Excerpt from ARTICLE 19
States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from…maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse...


ARTICLE 34

States Parties undertake to protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse.

For these purposes, States Parties shall in particular take all appropriate national, bilateral and multilateral measures to prevent:

(a) The inducement or coercion of a child to engage in any unlawful sexual activity;

(b) The exploitative use of children in prostitution or other unlawful sexual practices;

(c) The exploitative use of children in pornographic performances and materials.


The OP fails to differentiate between acts child molestation and an orientation toward pedophilia.

While there's truth to the claim pedophiles and suspected pedophiles are sometimes the targets of overzealous public servants or of self-identified creep hunters, their rights are not being violated by the existence of child protection laws aimed at molesters and nor do such laws somehow ‘cause more harm than good' (as the OP irrationally believes).

The OP's argument to “decriminalise” pedophilia is a strawman. Pedophilia is not illegal.

Even pedophilic “art” in the form of fantssy writing isn't illegal (in Canada).

Back in 2001, John Robin Sharpe was facing the Supreme Court of British Columbia to answer charges of possessing child pornography – including a series of his own writings, which included detailed descriptions of things like torture and the rape of infants. While Sharpe was convicted of possessing the photographic images (which obviously involved crimes against children and the violation of their rights), the Court ruled Sharpe's writing is protected speech similar in artistic merit to writings produced by the Marquis de Sade. [Content of the Supreme Court Ruling]

Child molestation is illegal. A sexual attraction toward children is not.

Desire in itself, no matter how disordered, can't be criminalised: An attempt to outlaw elements of a person's interior world (e.g., his fantasy life) would be impossible to enforce. Setting aside how unethical a law like that would be, the purely practical difficulties of implementation would require that investigators commit gross human and civil rights abuses in search of violations.

If the OP had argued that pedophiles should not be treated as criminals in the absence of any wrong-doing, he would have had ground to stand on – especially since pedophiles would be more likely to seek help, limiting the risk they could pose to children, if there were safe mental health options available. At present, a non-active pedophile could still be subject to mandatory reporting that could in turn ruin every aspect of his life.

Dr. James Cantor is a clinical psychologist specialising in paraphilias. One of his more notable contributions to the understanding of pedophilia is in his recognition that pedophilia has a physiological cause detectable by MRI. He provides an insightful overview of his findings in THIS INTERVIEW.

His comments during the interview support the idea that non-offending pedophiles are better off being offered anonymous help than they are by being stigmatised.

He also points out that the mechanisms that create homosexual orientation (much like those that create heterosexual orientation) are far different in nature and effect than are those that create a pedophilic orientation.

Obviously, laws against sexually abusing minors are legitimate, existing to protect children from situations that could scar them for life.

And Cantor makes clear that, while people can't chose their orientations, pedophiles are aware of right and wrong and are legally and morally responsible for their actions.

4/15/2018 6:57:00 PM



the very fact that pedophilia is illegal and despised by society that makes it so harmful.




It is the fact child can't consent you shithole

4/15/2018 7:11:53 PM

pyro

"disgusting to me" doesn't seem relevant to lawmaking.

What might be relevant, though, is the question of whether pedophilia might actually be curable, or at least reducible, in a way that the patient doesn't want to f kids at all.

4/15/2018 8:32:41 PM

Prager

I doubt I'm the only one who feels physically ill after reading this.

4/16/2018 4:09:55 AM

breakerslion

"Now, the crux of the matter is what is 'legal' and what is not."

That's right. It's not.

We put it to a vote. As a result of that vote, anyone who thinks it should be legal doesn't get a vote. So then we had anther vote. It's still illegal. So then we had yet another vote. As a result of that vote, anyone who thinks it should be legal can go piss up a rope. You get the idea?

4/16/2018 8:04:07 AM

Doubting Thomas

I suppose the reason pedophilia (or rather it's relating activities) is deemed illegal are because it must involve children, and it's harmful to children.


That, and the fact that children can't give knowledgable consent.

I think if pedophilia was to be decriminalized, folk like yourself, who have a natural sexual orientation towards children might get a chance to explore that in a more open and less harmful way.


Uh no. It's still going to be harmful to the children you are molesting and raping.

Pornography involving children doesn't have to be seedy abuse and extortion, it could be fair and accountable, regulated and operated according to welfare laws.


Except that, once again, children can't give consent to having their image used as fap material for a bunch of pervs. I don't think any kid wants to grow up with that.

4/16/2018 8:49:23 AM

Doubting Thomas

@#2147439

This is why I'm conflicted about fictionalized child porn, for example shotacon or lolicon anime, or written erotica. It's obviously not a real child, and no child was harmed during the creation of the work. It allows those with sexual attraction to children an outlet that doesn't involve hurting real kids... but on the other hand, it also allows them to continue to get off thinking about having sex with kids, which is disgusting to me.


I agree totally. Do we give them an outlet, or do we try to get them to stop thinking of having sex with children? Will fictionalized child porn be enough for them, or will they want actual pictures or video?

4/16/2018 8:52:39 AM

Karana

"it's the very fact that pedophilia is illegal and despised by society that makes it so harmful. "
The fuck even is this? opposite day?
this was the correct part of your statement "I suppose the reason pedophilia (or rather it's relating activities) is deemed illegal are because it must involve children, and it's harmful to children."

Consenting adults.

4/16/2018 11:07:20 AM

Chloe

Oh hell no.

4/16/2018 11:21:00 AM

Marc

the very fact that pedophilia is illegal and despised by society that makes it so harmful.

You have a partial point here (though you go in the wrong direction with it entirely). In the US, at least, if a person who has a sexual desire for children goes to seek help from a psychiatrist, the psychiatrist is required by law to report that person. That person then becomes a sexual predator, despite not having done anything yet, and having sought help to not act on their desires. This creates an attitude of "Why bother seeking help? I might as well just do it."

When a person does commit pedophila and is sent to prison, after they get out, they are required to register as a sex offender. In many areas, there are laws prohibiting sex offenders from living near children. In many cases, this has led to pedophiles having to be homeless (and jobless), increasing the chance that they are likely to become repeat offenders (because why not? If caught, they can at least have room and board in prison).

The fact that we punish pedophiles even before they act, and then make their lives worse after they serve their jail sentence makes pedophiles even more harmful, because there is no incentive for them to even try and prevent their behavior.

The rest of your post is just wrong.


7/1/2018 5:55:34 PM

1 | top: comments page