The better nature of pedosexuals

[Heretic]

Amazon is selling a book named \"The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure: a Child-lover's Code of Conduct\" where the author appeals to he better nature of pedosexuals. Seriously do Pedophiles have a better nature?

[null0010]

So?

[CUDA]

So?

SO???

maybe because Pedophilia is illegal

[Heretic]

So?

Great answer to the question I asked.

[null0010]

It's a book. Books aren't illegal, not even books about illegal things. Free speech, etc.

[Grendel]

They sell Mein Kampf too.

[Spidey]

Removed because of ninja edit.

My bad…I’ll make sure to quote you from now on.

[Grendel]

Nice try, but \"sexual preference\" is defined as \"The preference one shows by having a sexual interest in members of the same, opposite, or either sex.\"

[Heretic]

It's a book. Books aren't illegal, not even books about illegal things. Free speech, etc.

Still not an answer to the question I ask

[Spidey]

Grendel…what the hell are you talking about?

[null0010]

It's a book. Books aren't illegal, not even books about illegal things. Free speech, etc.

Still not an answer to the question I ask

Pedophiles are people too, just like sociopaths and schizophrenics.

[Grendel]

Spidey -- Hahaha. Let's have the audience guessing what the hell you where saying.

[Xamindar]

Spidey -- Hahaha. Let's have the audience guessing what the hell you where saying.

So Spidey posts something, Grendel responds to it, then Spidey quickly edits his first post to remove what Grendel was responding to. Then later Spidey responds to Grendel asking what Grendel is talking about?

Is that what happened?

[Heretic]

I wouldn't lump Pedophiles in with Schizophrenics, Sociopaths I can see. They have a total disregard for the rules and the rights of other human beings just as a Pedophile does. Schizophrenia is treatable. Granted some Sociopaths may have Schizophrenia but not all.

so·ci·o·path   
[soh-see-uh-path, soh-shee-] –noun Psychiatry .
a person, as a psychopathic personality, whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

schiz·o·phre·ni·a   
[skit-suh-free-nee-uh, -freen-yuh]
–noun
1.
Psychiatry . Also called dementia praecox. a severe mental disorder characterized by some, but not necessarily all, of the following features: emotional blunting, intellectual deterioration, social isolation, disorganized speech and behavior, delusions, and hallucinations.
2.
a state characterized by the coexistence of contradictory or incompatible elements.

[Foil]

The original post reads more like a critique of Amazon's choice of books to offer, but I think Heretic's 'question' is this:

...do Pedophiles have a better nature?

Depends on what you're asking.

If you're asking about their entire nature (not just sexual), then it's possible. A person doesn't have to be 100% evil in every way to be sexually evil; e.g. "He seemed so nice, I never thought..." .

If you're talking about their sexual nature, then no. They are what they are.

[Neo]

If they change their sexual natures to something acceptable (e.g., none :P) then yes. Otherwise no.

</thread>

[null0010]

First off, all the people complaining about the sale of this book have caused Amazon to remove it from their website.

This book is/was meant to be a sort of self-help book for pedophiles.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101110/ap_ ... hilia_book

The author of "The Pedophile's Guide," listed as Philip R. Greaves II, argues that pedophiles are misunderstood, as the word literally means to love a child. The author adds that it is only a crime to act on sexual impulses toward children, and offers advice that purportedly allows pedophiles to abide by the law.

I don't have an e-book reader thingie myself, so I can't comment on what, exactly, the advice within was, but to me, that seems like an alright, if a little creepy, book.

[Lothar]

...do Pedophiles have a better nature?

If you're talking about their sexual nature, then no. They are what they are.

Not necessarily.

For a person to be a "pedophile", that means their primary sexual interest is in prepubescent children (hebephiles and ephebophiles are interested in pubescent and late adolescents, respectively.) They may also be sexually interested in adults; the term refers only to their primary attraction.

Note that "pedophile" refers to interest; "sexual abuser" or "sexual predator" refers to someone who acts upon that interest. Pedophilia is legal, while abuse/predation are illegal. Chris Hansen of "To Catch a Predator" has made the point that his show isn't targeting pedophiles but sexual predators.

I would argue that a pedophile who is not also a predator does in fact have a "better nature". A sexual predator is a sociopath, but a pedophile who does not act on his impulses is not. From what I understand (no, I haven't read it), much of the point of said book was argument along the lines of "don't be a predator". Essentially, it was a "how to keep yourself under control so you don't become an abuser" guide. It sounds like the comment that it was meant to appeal to their better nature is dead on.

[Neo]

All in favour of lowering the legal marriage/dating limit or whatever it's called to age 11 years, say 'I'

[Foil]

...do Pedophiles have a better nature?

If you're talking about their sexual nature, then no. They are what they are.

Not necessarily.

I would argue that a pedophile who is not also a predator does in fact have a "better nature". A sexual predator is a sociopath, but a pedophile who does not act on his impulses is not.

I can agree with that.

Perhaps I should have made the distinction; I intended the "pedophile" term to mean those who have the tendency and act on it ("predator" in your post's terminology).

The other point that seems to be unclear is whether the book is suggesting "change your actions" (e.g. don't act on bad impulses, which I think is reasonable) or "change your nature" (e.g. remove the impulse, which I'm not convinced is entirely possible).

[Gooberman]

I can buy that it is a mental disorder, but given the high repetition rate, I don't think anyone who acts on it should ever be allowed back into society.

[Mjolnir]

Sometimes I wonder, and this is not an attempt to excuse any wrong doing or anything but I do wonder if some of these horrendous experiences are only horrendous due to being told it is in fact, a horrendous thing. My main question on that is it's known that children will \"play\" around with each other and it seems to have no ill effect... but I guess it does become a bad experience when it's forced to a point or lead in a direction they wouldn't naturally go.

Just thinking out loud here, always fascinated by this stuff.

[Foil]

My God, Mjolnir... I hope you're not suggesting that it's okay for an adult and child to 'play' sexually, even if the child isn't having a bad time.

That's a f***ed up statement.

[Will Robinson]

... but I guess it does become a bad experience when it's forced to a point or lead in a direction they wouldn't naturally go.

Just thinking out loud here, always fascinated by this stuff.

You "guess" it becomes bad when sex is forced?!? And on a child no less?!? You guess?!?!

[null0010]

He's navel-gazing on societal norms and cultural taboos, not endorsing anything as \"okay.\" I think your reply says more about you than him.

[Will Robinson]

He's navel-gazing on societal norms and cultural taboos, not endorsing anything as "okay." I think your reply says more about you than him.

My reply is pretty straight forward. I think it is wrong to be unsure if forcing sex on a child is bad.
I think by the time you learn to type words on the internet you should be pretty sure if raping children is bad or good!

Apparently I'm supposed to know that he is "navel-gazing" whatever the ★■◆● that is, and therefore his comment, which clearly expressed uncertainty about the good and bad of child rape didn't mean that at all?!? So I'm the bad guy for not knowing wtf he's really typing about?!?

[Foil]

Will, Mjolnir is excluding rape, or anything forcible.

...However, with that said...

Null, Mjolnir isn't just talking taboos and culture. He is implying the possibility that adult/child sexual 'play' is okay, because such play happens between children. I'm sorry, but that still crosses a line.

[Will Robinson]

Will, Mjolnir is excluding rape, or anything forcible. ..

You seem more sure of that than he is because sex between an adult and child is rape and not natural, at least not in modern times. He doesn't seem too sure that it is bad.

[null0010]

I'm thinking you should probably allow him to respond before losing your sh*t:

Sometimes I wonder, and this is not an attempt to excuse any wrong doing or anything but I do wonder if

I wonder, and this is not an attempt to excuse any wrong doing or anything but I do

and this is not an attempt to excuse any wrong doing or anything

this is not an attempt to excuse any wrong doing

not an attempt to excuse

Additionally, it's ridiculous to attack Mjolnir for this but not attack Neo for his desire to lower the age of consent to 11.

[Heretic]

Null Educate yourself about Neo's response. A better question, why Mjolnir is fascinated by sexual interest in prepubescent children?

[null0010]

Null Educate yourself about Neo's response. A better question, why Mjolnir is fascinated by sexual interest in prepubescent children?

Heaven forbid someone ask a question about society and human nature that makes people uncomfortable. We can't have that, oh no.

[Mjolnir]

I'm not even going to dignify most of the replies with one of my own, due to their ludicrous nature.
Except for two things going beyond the pale with this one -

Null Educate yourself about Neo's response. A better question, why Mjolnir is fascinated by sexual interest in prepubescent children?

You seem to be insinuating that I myself would be interested in such a thing, and after I clearly stated in my post that I was fascinated in what causes someone to view an event as traumatic and not the actual act.

You "guess" it becomes bad when sex is forced?!? And on a child no less?!? You guess?!?!

Did you read what I wrote? I know you have a selective memory when it comes to facts but for christ sakes the quote is right above your text, I did not say "I guess it's bad for a child to be rape" as if it was a question, I was questioning the threshold for, again, what makes a traumatic even, traumatic, and I was stating that rape or being forced in some way would be bad.

Although to be fair, I do tend to speak in vague ways like that when leading into another thought, and text on a forum never really gives the full weight of emphasis so I guess depending on how you read it, it could be misread like that. (so much for not dignifying any of this with a response eh? lol)

[Foil]

...it's ridiculous to attack Mjolnir for this but not attack Neo for his desire to lower the age of consent to 11.

Those here who know Neo know he wasn't suggesting that (quite the opposite, I think, given Neo's usual tone).

Heaven forbid someone ask a question about society and human nature that makes people uncomfortable. We can't have that, oh no.

Again, Mjolnir was not simply questioning taboos and asking uncomfortable questions. (If that's all he was doing, it would be perfectly fine.)

He was positing the idea that adult/child sexual 'play' is acceptable, because it happens between children.

[@Mjolnir: If you meant something else, I think it's time you explain; because as it stands, the idea you're posing about adult/child 'play' is absolutely screwed up.]

[Foil]

D'oh, Mjolnir posted while I was typing...

[Foil]

I was questioning the threshold for, again, what makes a traumatic even, traumatic, and I was stating that rape or being forced in some way would be bad.

Okay. Here's where you went off the deep end:

First, you suggested that the threshold for adult/child trauma is the point where things become forced. You then added thoughts about how sex play between children is unforced.

The natural implication then becomes: "Adult/child sex play is not traumatic if it's unforced."

That's what you're suggesting, correct?

[null0010]

No, that's where your mind took it. He never said that.

[Foil]

...it's known that children will "play" around with each other and it seems to have no ill effect... but I guess it does become a bad experience when it's forced to a point or lead in a direction they wouldn't naturally go.

The implication seems clear to me.

Mjolnir?

[Mjolnir]

I was questioning the threshold for, again, what makes a traumatic even, traumatic, and I was stating that rape or being forced in some way would be bad.

Okay. Here's where you went off the deep end:

First, you suggested that the threshold for adult/child trauma is the point where things become forced. You then added thoughts about how sex play between children is unforced.

The natural implication then becomes: "Adult/child sex play is not traumatic if it's unforced."

That's what you're suggesting, correct?

Not really, too be honest I didn't think I was suggesting or implying anything at all I was just throwing out questions and ideas on trauma or whatever as a way to open up discussion, but it seems to have backfired.

I mean, what do we even mean when we say "not forced", I question also whether it's possible for an adult, who knows what is happening to not force it in some way if they head down that road either by hand or by emotion/what have you since I would assume the child doesn't have a... I guess a conceptual idea of what they're even doing.

I can't write out what I meant properly the first time though apparantely so what the hell do I know? lol

[woodchip]

Sometimes I wonder, and this is not an attempt to excuse any wrong doing or anything but I do wonder if some of these horrendous experiences are only horrendous due to being told it is in fact, a horrendous thing.

So if someone says it is not horrendous then it is O.K.? Let me see what the proper response is...oh yeah! Facepalm!!

[null0010]

Sometimes I wonder, and this is not an attempt to excuse any wrong doing or anything but I do wonder if some of these horrendous experiences are only horrendous due to being told it is in fact, a horrendous thing.

So if someone says it is not horrendous then it is O.K.? Let me see what the proper response is...oh yeah! Facepalm!!

And then it's also okay to grossly misinterpret forum posts in order to smear someone? Let me see what the proper response is...oh yeah! Facepalm!!

And Foil, you are making that connection for yourself. Why would you assume something so ludicrous as Mjolnir thinking that sexual abuse is acceptable? That's ridiculous, especially coming from you, who always comments on how it isn't right to engage in personal attacks. Shame, sir. Shame.