ForumsWEPRRespect for Pedophiles?

27 2657
Salvidian
offline
Salvidian
4,229 posts
2,255

Just a random shot kind of thread. Keeping the topic short and general. The OP is also pretty small, for your sake if anything. I was just curious about AG's opinion on pedophiles.

Do pedophiles deserve respect?

Which kind of pedophiles deserve respect?

What laws limit pedophiles? Do they violate civil liberties?

If you're not aware of this already, a pedophile is someone who "likes 'em young." In other words, attracted to children.

  • 27 Replies
loloynage2
offline
loloynage2
4,231 posts
1,000

Do pedophiles deserve respect?

I don't know, kind of a personal opinion...

Which kind of pedophiles deserve respect?

The ones that wear pink?

What laws limit pedophiles? Do they violate civil liberties?

What??? I pretty sure imprisonment due to **** is not a violation of civil liberty. If it's under consent, then I'm all for it. I don't think the law should stop me from loving a 40 year old woman/man.
314d1
offline
314d1
3,857 posts
0

Just a random shot kind of thread. Keeping the topic short and general. The OP is also pretty small, for your sake if anything. I was just curious about AG's opinion on pedophiles.


I am wondering what you are expecting them to be.

Which kind of pedophiles deserve respect?


The kind that are not adults.

What laws limit pedophiles? Do they violate civil liberties?


There are a tone of them, I would not say that they violate civil liberties.

If you're not aware of this already, a pedophile is someone who "likes 'em young." In other words, attracted to children.


If your not aware of this, you probably are to young to be talking about this.

What??? I pretty sure imprisonment due to **** is not a violation of civil liberty. If it's under consent, then I'm all for it. I don't think the law should stop me from loving a 40 year old woman/man.


Perhaps not, but I would assume that you are old enough to think for yourself? I would say that people of...Sixteen, with parents consent, should be able to have sex with other consenting physically mature adults.

If people younger then sixteen are having sex, even consenting, then it is pretty much ****. A six year old girl is pretty much just a puppet, to say that someone should be aloud to have sex with her if he asks is just horrible, especially if it is someone like a parent. Why should it be aloud at all?
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,598 posts
3,675

Three things come to mind when I read the OP.

1) A pedophile is not a sexual offender. A pedophile is defined as: "noun
a person who is sexually attracted to children."

Oxford Dictionary

2) I see no reason why anyone deserves to not be respected based on an attraction/preference alone.

3) The whole "not able to make their own informed decision" card is played a lot, but, you can't just blanket statement say "all 18 year old people magically know what they are getting into." There are people who are ready (mature enough/informed) much earlier, and there are people who never go beyond the mindset of a child.

I would say that people of...Sixteen, with parents consent, should be able to have sex with other consenting physically mature adults.


Why do parents need to give their consent?

Why should it be aloud at all?


Again, there's a difference between a pedophile and someone who has sex with under-aged partners. Pedophilia is simply having the attraction.
314d1
offline
314d1
3,857 posts
0

Three things come to mind when I read the OP.

1) A pedophile is not a sexual offender. A pedophile is defined as: "noun
a person who is sexually attracted to children."

Oxford Dictionary


English is a living language. People say "Pedophile" to mean someone who has sex with children, so that is what it means. Or what would you call people who actually have sex with children?

2) I see no reason why anyone deserves to not be respected based on an attraction/preference alone.


Nor does anyone else?

3) The whole "not able to make their own informed decision" card is played a lot, but, you can't just blanket statement say "all 18 year old people magically know what they are getting into." There are people who are ready (mature enough/informed) much earlier, and there are people who never go beyond the mindset of a child.


Witch is why they should have parental consent if they are under 16, since it is more likely that the parents will be on board if they are prepared. If you are eighteen, your old enough to live by yourself and presumed capable of choosing your own decisions, as being physically mature enough to act on those decisions. Since the law can't go case by case, I say 18 for a cutoff, 16 with parents permission.

Why do parents need to give their consent?


As you just said, it is a case by case business. Having parental consent lowers the chance of it being a random, unknown manipulator, as well as lowering the chance of someone they knew as a friend rather than a sex partner. It works great as a fail safe. Why shouldn't they have parent's permission, when they are at the age when their parents pretty much control them in the matters of law?

Again, there's a difference between a pedophile and someone who has sex with under-aged partners. Pedophilia is simply having the attraction.


Once again, English is a living language. If people are using the word "Pedophile" to mean someone who has sex with little kids, then that is what it means. Or what word would you rather we use? "People who have sex with under age children" is a lot harder to type.
thebluerabbit
offline
thebluerabbit
5,353 posts
1,525

well im not sure if you mean a person who just likes children sexualy or a person whoa ctually has sex with children.

Do pedophiles deserve respect?

yes they do. they are humans and deserve the same respect any other human recieves.

Which kind of pedophiles deserve respect?

those who didnt let their fetish get the better of them and **** a child.

What laws limit pedophiles? Do they violate civil liberties?

every law limits every living human so thats a pretty weird question.

the fact that someone likes children sexualy doesnt mean anything bad about the person. people for some reason think there is a connection of ones sexual needs and his personality/"goodness". a pedophile/zoophile/necrophile can be a good person and wont necesairly do what he wants to do.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,540 posts
2,210

Again, there's a difference between a pedophile and someone who has sex with under-aged partners. Pedophilia is simply having the attraction.


This is a distinction far to often not made. There are pedophiles who while enjoying a sexual fantasy of children would think actually doing something to be bad as it comes with a high risk of physical and possibly emotional harm to the child.

3) The whole "not able to make their own informed decision" card is played a lot, but, you can't just blanket statement say "all 18 year old people magically know what they are getting into." There are people who are ready (mature enough/informed) much earlier, and there are people who never go beyond the mindset of a child.


There is some validity in this point when playing the odds. With adults we expect them to take on responsibilities even if they haven't gotten past some mindsets. This expectation doesn't really exist nor should it with children. Of course taking on these responsibilities also grants the ability to make choices we didn't have before.
But even in a situation where the child could decide for themselves there is still an issue of an unequal relationship. The child would be in a situation where the adult would have some form of dominance. The two would simply be playing on two completely different levels so to speak.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,598 posts
3,675

English is a living language. People say "Pedophile" to mean someone who has sex with children, so that is what it means. Or what would you call people who actually have sex with children?


Whether or not that's what they mean by the word, how I use it and how it's officially defined is what I was referring to. There's a difference between slang and common language.

As for what I'd call people who have sex with children, terms such as "sexual offender" "child rapist" "molester" or "sexual predator" would all be more fitting.

Nor does anyone else?


Okay then? I was responding to this bit in the OP post: "Do pedophiles deserve respect?

Witch is why they should have parental consent if they are under 16, since it is more likely that the parents will be on board if they are prepared.


Perhaps, perhaps not. You're appealing to the common sense and quality of parents, as well as banking on that they know their child well enough to have an accurate view.

If you are eighteen, your old enough to live by yourself and presumed capable of choosing your own decisions, as being physically mature enough to act on those decisions. Since the law can't go case by case, I say 18 for a cutoff, 16 with parents permission.


Indeed that is where law fails, the exceptions. As to when parental permissible intercourse should be allowed, that is an entirely separate subject.

Why shouldn't they have parent's permission, when they are at the age when their parents pretty much control them in the matters of law?


I don't agree with the traditional role of parents, the "my house my rules you either follow them or get out" sort of thing. I believe parents should teach, support, and provide for their children, not be a dictator towards them. Yes, under the law it would make sense for parents to be involved, but this isn't a legal issue unless it is made one.

Once again, English is a living language. If people are using the word "Pedophile" to mean someone who has sex with little kids, then that is what it means.


I don't think you using the term quite right "living language" and are misconstruing that in order to try to make a point. Yes, languages change. Yes, language is determined by common and consistent usage of specific meanings to words. However, people also don't know their own language very well a lot of the time and use words wrong. That is part of how the language changes, ironically enough.

Dictionaries change with the language, that's why they release new ones every so often. What's in the dictionary "usually" is what the word means in day to day context. Just because some or many people don't know the proper definitions or meanings or usages of words does not make them correct.

There also is the differentiation between slang and the language. "wassup" isn't an actual word, but most everyone I've ever encountered knows that it means "hello."

Or what word would you rather we use? "People who have sex with under age children" is a lot harder to type.


Restatement from above.

"sexual offender" "child rapist" "molester" or "sexual predator"
314d1
offline
314d1
3,857 posts
0

Whether or not that's what they mean by the word, how I use it and how it's officially defined is what I was referring to. There's a difference between slang and common language.


Is there now? Lets go ask five random people what a pedophile is and see what they answer. I think the definition of "someone who has sex with children" would be one of the most likely said statements.

As for what I'd call people who have sex with children, terms such as "sexual offender" "child rapist" "molester" or "sexual predator" would all be more fitting.


But what would you call it if it was legal? All of those statements have negative meanings, what would you call legal sex?

Okay then? I was responding to this bit in the OP post: "Do pedophiles deserve respect?


It sounds like he is using it to mean "People who have sex with children" as well...

Perhaps, perhaps not. You're appealing to the common sense and quality of parents, as well as banking on that they know their child well enough to have an accurate view.


In any case, it is a good fail safe, we can't make laws to the lowest denominator.

I don't agree with the traditional role of parents, the "my house my rules you either follow them or get out" sort of thing. I believe parents should teach, support, and provide for their children, not be a dictator towards them. Yes, under the law it would make sense for parents to be involved, but this isn't a legal issue unless it is made one.


Parents are the lawful guardians of the child. They are responsible for the well being of the child, especially as the law is concerned. The parent's signature is necessary in many legal actions, so why wouldn't it be needed?

It is a legal issue. It is totally a legal issue, why wouldn't it be?

I don't think you using the term quite right "living language" and are misconstruing that in order to try to make a point. Yes, languages change. Yes, language is determined by common and consistent usage of specific meanings to words. However, people also don't know their own language very well a lot of the time and use words wrong. That is part of how the language changes, ironically enough.


I know what I am saying. When people use a word to mean something, no matter if you think it is wrong enough, then the word changes. That is why it is a living language. What does nerd mean? It means someone who is smart, but socially awkward and interested in weird things, correct? Nope- it means "1.
a stupid, irritating, ineffectual, or unattractive person. ". So that must be what it means, right? It isn't like it could change or anything. The dictionary means nothing to people.

Dictionaries change with the language, that's why they release new ones every so often. What's in the dictionary "usually" is what the word means in day to day context. Just because some or many people don't know the proper definitions or meanings or usages of words does not make them correct.


No matter what a book says, no matter what book it is, whatever people say a word means is what a word means. The book says "Ain't" isn't a word? Doesn't matter. People use it anyway. So it is a word, no matter if you say it isn't or not.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,598 posts
3,675

Is there now? Lets go ask five random people what a pedophile is and see what they answer. I think the definition of "someone who has sex with children" would be one of the most likely said statements.


Perhaps. They are still using the word wrong though. This isn't really relevant anyways.

But what would you call it if it was legal? All of those statements have negative meanings, what would you call legal sex?


Sex? Seems pretty straightforward.

It is a legal issue. It is totally a legal issue, why wouldn't it be?


Because it's not at base a legal issue, but a personal feeling/action. It's only a legal matter when you try to make it so and impose regulations and restrictions on it in regards to specific terms.

. When people use a word to mean something, no matter if you think it is wrong enough, then the word changes.


Correction: When the majority of people use a word to mean something for extended periods of time, then the word changes.

The book says "Ain't" isn't a word?


Hmm...
but
it does?

Dictionaries change with the language.

So it is a word, no matter if you say it isn't or not.


I never said it wasn't a word. I said that a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children, but that doesn't mean they are a sexual offender, molester, rapist, or whatever you want to call breaking the law to have sex with an underage person.

Just because people don't know the exact definition or tag along extra meaning to it doesn't make them right, or make the language change.
314d1
offline
314d1
3,857 posts
0

Perhaps. They are still using the word wrong though. This isn't really relevant anyways.


Then why did you bring it up?

Now lets see. If everyone is using the word "Wrong" to mean the same thing, doesn't that make it right?

Sex? Seems pretty straightforward.


Well most people would call him a pedophile and call it strieght forward. Would this not be accurate?

Because it's not at base a legal issue, but a personal feeling/action. It's only a legal matter when you try to make it so and impose regulations and restrictions on it in regards to specific terms.


Witch it should be, a legal issue. While you can call it a personal feeling/action, when you are at the age where you can be controlled with candy, video games, and puppies, your not fit to have sex. Any attempt for someone to have sex at such a young age with someone at a much older age is pretty much just ****, or are you saying that that five year old boy should have sex with that nice priest who lets him stay up late?

Correction: When the majority of people use a word to mean something for extended periods of time, then the word changes.


Great. Come back in five years then.

Hmm...
but
it does?

Dictionaries change with the language.


Not really. Each one of these websites basically said "WE HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR YEARS FOR THIS TO NOT BE A WORD!" and slapped "Informal", "Nonstandard", or some variation of such on each.

I never said it wasn't a word. I said that a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children, but that doesn't mean they are a sexual offender, molester, rapist, or whatever you want to call breaking the law to have sex with an underage person.


According to you and Mr.Webster, but who cares what either of you think?

Just because people don't know the exact definition or tag along extra meaning to it doesn't make them right, or make the language change.


It does if they do it enough.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,598 posts
3,675

Then why did you bring it up?


I stated in my first post that pedophiles are not always sexual offenders, that is all. You decided to say that if people misuse the word than that's what it means, to which I responded that that alone does not make the meaning change.

Well most people would call him a pedophile and call it strieght forward. Would this not be accurate?


It is accurate, but not in the sense that you mean. In much the same way that you don't call the act of having sex with your wife "heterosexual" you don't call having sex with a kid &quotedophilia." They are states of attraction, not actions.

While you can call it a personal feeling/action, when you are at the age where you can be controlled with candy, video games, and puppies, your not fit to have sex


I would have to agree.

Any attempt for someone to have sex at such a young age with someone at a much older age is pretty much just ****, or are you saying that that five year old boy should have sex with that nice priest who lets him stay up late?


No, I'm not. What I am saying is that you wish it to be a legal matter when it should simply be the choices between the involved party. It only becomes a legal matter when you want to turn it into such, i.e, making it a requirement for parents to consent in a legal way.

Not really. Each one of these websites basically said "WE HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR YEARS FOR THIS TO NOT BE A WORD!" and slapped "Informal", "Nonstandard", or some variation of such on each.


That's not what I read. Each gave a history of the word, said that it has been used in the past as correct language, died out, and now is being used again but isn't considered "formal" and should not be used in an academic setting.

Basically they all said it's halfway between slang and correct language.

According to you and Mr.Webster, but who cares what either of you think?


What needs to be understood is that the word &quotedophile" is not some straightforward designation, nor does the term have the same meaning as most use it. Pedophilia is a mental disorder and has it's own criteria which are debated among psychologists.

I leave you with this article, take what you will from it.

The DSM Diagnostic Criteria for Pedophilia

Please note that if you respond in your usual "attack dog" style, I will hereafter just ignore any such points.
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,540 posts
2,210

Pedophilia is a mental disorder and has it's own criteria which are debated among psychologists.


This brings up something. Should it be considered a mental disorder? It is the only form of sexual attraction regarded as such.
dair5
offline
dair5
3,418 posts
1,500

This brings up something. Should it be considered a mental disorder? It is the only form of sexual attraction regarded as such.


I don't think it should. Maybe one day it will change like homosexuality. It would probably still be illegal to act on those desires, but maybe the desire itself won't be considered a disorder in the future.

I think pedophiles deserve respect just like anyone else. Even if you don't respect their desire it's not their fault they have it.
KrissKhan
offline
KrissKhan
274 posts
2,070

Hum, yes and I have so much respect for serial killers, that's not their bad if they have the desire to kill people :O
Poor serial killers, poor pedophiles. Why people and laws are against them ?! D:

rofl
Don't forget the difference between do and would like when you're speaking of respect.


The only one who didn't shocked me was BlueRabbit ._. Jeez guys, you should be more carefully when you're speaking about "hot" themes like that. Sometimes your ideas are not really not clear...

loloynage2
offline
loloynage2
4,231 posts
1,000

Hum, yes and I have so much respect for serial killers, that's not their bad if they have the desire to kill people :O

If you are being sarcastic then let me tell you that sometimes killers can't control urges.

By the way, shouldn't respect be given by the actions of someone and not their sexual preference?
Showing 1-15 of 27