[Flipside]

Well, that middle ground has become a minefield thanks to the rampant paranoia regarding pedophiles anyway.

I grew up in a Council house, and to save water when I was 1 and my brother was 3 (remember, we are talking 1973 here), we used to share the bathwater. My parents had photographs of use both in the bath together.

Nowadays, such photographs would potentially cause all kinds of trouble with the Police, because of the fact that we seem incapable of drawing a line between photographs of children while they are naked and indecent photographs of children.

[AdmiralRalwood]

First off, there's the point about enabling which was made earlier.

...had already been rebutted. Again, lolicon. Also, people with "good imaginations".

So you think looking at lolicon or "using your imagination" is sufficient to substitute for professional mental help?

Thirdly, suppressing urges does not work. They absolutely need to be treated.

...is wrong, as conveniently explained by Flipside here (albeit after your post)

Slight Devils Advocate here, but I can't stop a part of my brain thinking, "you know, I am sexually attracted to women, and yet can work in an environment with females and not sexually assault any of them".

Certainly, those with a record for child abuse should be kept away from children, but I can't help thinking that's not because they are pedophiles, it's because they are criminals.

Edit : I see an incurable Catch-22 raising its head here to be honest, after all, heterosexuals (and, indeed homosexuals) have access to sexual gratification online without any real stigma attached to it these days, the same cannot be said for pedophiles, for very obvious reasons. There's been evidence that access to porn has reduced sexual assaults (though it has also had other, negative effects such as unrealistic expectations), but you simply cannot apply that kind of thinking with regards to this particular issue, so I really don't know the solution to that problem.

This once again argues that pedophilia is a sexual orientation, which it is not, making more of those insulting false equivalences.

And finally

Secondly, statements like this are themselves a form of enabling ("Hey, look, this person on the internet says I can suppress my urges and be totally fine. Whew! I guess it's all right, then!").

...the part that takes your post from "wrong" to "offensive", because you're effectively telling me to not say what I want to say. And it's wrong. There have thus far been 890 views of this thread, many of them redundant. Of however many unique readers that is, I can say with 99.9% confidence that not one of those people is a pedophile who would have sought treatment, but changed their mind after reading my post.

Yes, I am telling you not to say that pedophilia can be dealt with entirely by just suppressing your urges. I'm not saying you can't say it; I'm saying you shouldn't, because it's wrong, and spreading misinformation is always harmful, and in this case the end harm could be child abuse, and I don't want that.

I certainly hope the percentage of people who read this thread that are "pedophiles who might have sought treatment, but decided not to" is 0%. I'm not saying your specific post is likely to be the cause of that... but it does contribute to a general atmosphere, perpetuating misinformation, which somebody might then perpetuate somewhere else, to be seen by someone else, who may or may not spread that idea further... the ultimate impact is impossible to know (and could very well be "none whatsoever"). However, one can guarantee no negative impact by not spreading misinformation in the first place, no?

[Lorric]

It doesn't matter whether it's a sexual orientation or not.

All that matters is it is not a conscious decision. No one would consciously choose to be a paedophile, except maybe some sick and twisted individuals who don't care about hurting other people.

I also believe Aardwolf wasn't talking about abstention, but control. That's why he's talking about Lolicon and imagination. If a paedophile is jacking off to some Lolicon to get their fix, then that can help keep them under control. Most people don't go out raping people if they're starved of sex for a long time.

[Flipside]

Take BDSM, it's not a sexual orientation, it's a sexual preference, but that doesn't mean that you can control whether you like a bit of light bondage or not. However, if even if you do like bondage, it doesn't mean that it is an absolute requirement for you to engage in sexual activity, you can choose not to engage in it if your partner does not wish to.

Hasn't it ever struck you as odd that a woman dressed up as a schoolgirl is a common sexual fantasy?

Sexual attraction is a lot, lot more complex than simple black and white situations.

[AdmiralRalwood]

If a paedophile is jacking off to some Lolicon to get their fix, then that can help keep them under control.

"I don't understand why this alcoholic went on a drinking binge! They had a glass of wine with dinner every day!"

[Lorric]

I hate the very concept of people feeling guilty for sexual feelings, of any kind. It's beyond their control, they can't change how they feel. You're no less of a person for having feelings you didn't put there, no matter what they are. As long as you understand the difference between right and wrong, between fantasy and reality, between consent and no consent, you have nothing to be ashamed of. Thoughts aren't a crime. Actions can be.

If a paedophile is jacking off to some Lolicon to get their fix, then that can help keep them under control.

"I don't understand why this alcoholic went on a drinking binge! They had a glass of wine with dinner every day!"

Alcohol has addictive properties. Masturbation does not. Masturbation satiates sexual desire.

[AdmiralRalwood]

I hate the very concept of people feeling guilty for sexual feelings, of any kind. It's beyond their control, they can't change how they feel. You're no less of a person for having feelings you didn't put there, no matter what they are. As long as you understand the difference between right and wrong, between fantasy and reality, between consent and no consent, you have nothing to be ashamed of. Thoughts aren't a crime. Actions can be.

No, thoughts are not a crime... and there's no requirement that you feel guilty for stray thoughts going through your head. There's also nothing wrong with feeling shame if you happen to find yourself finding a prepubescent minor sexually attractive, and whether you feel any shame about it or not, if it happens on a regular basis, maybe you should think about seeing a professional.

If a paedophile is jacking off to some Lolicon to get their fix, then that can help keep them under control.

"I don't understand why this alcoholic went on a drinking binge! They had a glass of wine with dinner every day!"

Alcohol has addictive properties. Masturbation does not. Masturbation satiates sexual desire.

I wasn't talking about masturbation being addictive.

[Flipside]

If a paedophile is jacking off to some Lolicon to get their fix, then that can help keep them under control.

"I don't understand why this alcoholic went on a drinking binge! They had a glass of wine with dinner every day!"

To be fair, an alcoholic is defined by a high consumption of alcohol, not a glass of wine each day. That's more the definition of a relapse, not a failure of those glasses of wine to 'do the job'.

I don't think anyone is pretending that something like that would be a 'cure all', just that we need to be very careful about blanketing any sexual activity into a set of predefined values. I would never, ever support the concept of pedophilia, and any active pedophile certainly should be dealt with and helped, but just as other 'dark' sexual mentalities, such as rape fantasy, do not, in the vast majority of cases, lead to actual rape, we shouldn't assume that the fantasy leads to the act.

That said, we also need a society that can, if that person feels they are getting too close to the line, accept that and be willing to help them, because if we don't, then there is a high likelihood that line will be crossed, which is too high a price to pay.

I have more to say, but I have company, and this is a delicate issue that needs time to word properly without coming across as some kind of apologist.

[Lorric]

I wasn't talking about masturbation being addictive.

Then what is your point?

[MP-Ryan]

I think more to the question is what is anyone's point.  The lines of debate are getting funny and you all appear to be saying more or less the same thing.

The facts are that pedophilia is considered a social violation in most human societies (where they usually differ is not concerning pre-pubescent, but rather post), it is a learned thought process that is involuntary and neurologically reinforced, and that having these thoughts is not considered a crime, but acting on them - whether through pornography or physical acts - is.  And everyone in here seems OK with that status quo.

So what are you guys actually arguing about?  I'll be damned if I can tell.

[Lorric]

Me, I don't know what AdmiralRalwood's problem is. I am trying to work it out.

[Flipside]

I think the main point of the argument here appears to be that if a Pedophile doesn't actually commit the act, then are they a pedophile, which is a bit of an 'if a tree falls in the forest...' question to be honest.

My main concern is to try and deter the concept that pedophilia is, at the most fundamental level only, different from any other sexual preference.

Of course, once the actual act and society itself gets involved, that's a whole different bag of marbles.

[Lorric]

I think the main point of the argument here appears to be that if a Pedophile doesn't actually commit the act, then are they a pedophile, which is a bit of an 'if a tree falls in the forest...' question to be honest.

My main concern is to try and deter the concept that pedophilia is, at the most fundamental level only, different from any other sexual preference.

Of course, once the actual act and society itself gets involved, that's a whole different bag of marbles.

I'm kind of the same. Ralwood (as far as I can tell) seems to think anyone who has such attractions should report to the nearest medical facility at once. I say anyone who is perfectly in control shouldn't have to. That most of us, regardless of sexual leanings, are completely under control.

And I'm also going in on the stigma, which stops people from seeking help. Imagine if it was viewed as just another affliction. A serious one anyway. And people could actually be sympathetic about it, instead of treating people as monsters.

[AdmiralRalwood]

Ralwood (as far as I can tell) seems to think anyone who has such attractions should report to the nearest medical facility at once.

I said "if it happens on a regular basis", and I said "think about seeing a professional", not "report immediately for mind-cleansing".

I say anyone who is perfectly in control shouldn't have to. That most of us, regardless of sexual leanings, are completely under control.

Most of us do not have a mental illness in which we have urges to perform sexual acts on prepubescent minors, either. What applies to "most of us" isn't really relevant.

To be fair, an alcoholic is defined by a high consumption of alcohol, not a glass of wine each day. That's more the definition of a relapse, not a failure of those glasses of wine to 'do the job'.

Yes, that was... exactly my point. It does nothing to discourage a relapse, and may even help trigger one.

[Flipside]

There are very good reasons why a recovering alcoholic doesn't have half a glass of wine every day, because half a glass can so very easily become the entire crate. That's why active alcoholics go for 100% abstention, but not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic, and they can have half a glass of wine every day and never, ever drink the entire crate.

I'm stretching the analogy a bit, I know, but I hope I get the point across.

[Lorric]

Most of us do not have a mental illness in which we have urges to perform sexual acts on prepubescent minors, either. What applies to "most of us" isn't really relevant.

But it is. Most of us don't act out fantasies that would be wrong either. And there are a myriad of things beyond urges to perform sexual acts on prepubescent minors. How many times have you heard someone say something like "I'd love to rape her." or "Just give me five minutes alone with her..." do you think they actually would if they had the chance? They are just fantasising. There's nothing wrong with fantasy. Reality, then there is. Then most people know right from wrong. Then most people's conscience will come into play as well.

There are other fantasies as well. If you play this, are you a bad person? Do you want to actually do this stuff? Really? Of course you don't. Same as video games. It's all about acting out fantasies. Not reality.

http://www.whackit.co/whack_your_boss_30_ways.html

To be fair, an alcoholic is defined by a high consumption of alcohol, not a glass of wine each day. That's more the definition of a relapse, not a failure of those glasses of wine to 'do the job'.

Yes, that was... exactly my point. It does nothing to discourage a relapse, and may even help trigger one.

But masturbation does. It's a reliever. Put it this way, let's say a paedophile is going to be in charge of a child and has a sexual attraction toward that child. Do you think the urge will be as strong if they engage in masturbation and get it out of their system before that child arrives? And most of us don't even need such a thing in the presence of a sexually attractive person.

And the alcohol I say is still a bad example. Drinking alcohol can lead to drinking more alcohol due to the addictive properties. Masturbation is not addictive. And even if it was, leading to more masturbation wouldn't be a problem. Fantasising and doing are two completely different things.

[AdmiralRalwood]

How many times have you heard someone say something like "I'd love to rape her." or "Just give me five minutes alone with her..." do you think they actually would if they had the chance?

...I have never, ever heard someone say that, and if I did, I would be very, very worried about what they might do later. If your first instinct isn't to talk to that person about exactly why saying things like that is itself potentially harmful, perhaps you need to do some research on rape culture.

There are very good reasons why a recovering alcoholic doesn't have half a glass of wine every day, because half a glass can so very easily become the entire crate.

...Yes, which is why pedophiles shouldn't look at lolicon.

not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic

And not everyone who has a stray sexual thought about prepubescent minors is a pedophile. I'm glad we seem to understand each other.

I'm stretching the analogy a bit

No, you're not; that was the whole point of the analogy. The situations are actually very comparable.

[Lorric]

How many times have you heard someone say something like "I'd love to rape her." or "Just give me five minutes alone with her..." do you think they actually would if they had the chance?

...I have never, ever heard someone say that, and if I did, I would be very, very worried about what they might do later. If your first instinct isn't to talk to that person about exactly why saying things like that is itself potentially harmful, perhaps you need to do some research on rape culture.

Really? Wow...

I've heard this kind of talk... uncountable times. First I want to be clear, I do not talk this way, I find it distasteful.

I've heard it a lot going through school, and also I've seen it plenty of times online. One place I can think of is the Betfair football forum. I don't gamble, but I'm a passionate football fan, and I sometimes like to watch the live football commentary. And particularly lately there have been match threads with pictures of the attractive female fans of various nationalities cropping up, which incite this kind of talk. I've seen it come up in Youtube commentary as well. I'm truly astonished that you've never come across such a thing.

[AdmiralRalwood]

I'm truly astonished that you've never come across such a thing.

Well, I meant that I don't hear it in real life, but I also don't watch videos like that, so I don't hear it at all very often.

First I want to be clear, I do not talk this way, I find it distasteful.

I'm sorry, what were you lying?

[Aardwolf]

First off, there's the point about enabling which was made earlier.

...had already been rebutted. Again, lolicon. Also, people with "good imaginations".

So you think looking at lolicon or "using your imagination" is sufficient to substitute for professional mental help?

I selected those cases specifically to demonstrate that pedophilia is not always harmful. In those cases, no substitute is needed.

Thirdly, suppressing urges does not work. They absolutely need to be treated.

...is wrong, as conveniently explained by Flipside here (albeit after your post)

Slight Devils Advocate here, but I can't stop a part of my brain thinking, "you know, I am sexually attracted to women, and yet can work in an environment with females and not sexually assault any of them".

Certainly, those with a record for child abuse should be kept away from children, but I can't help thinking that's not because they are pedophiles, it's because they are criminals.

Edit : I see an incurable Catch-22 raising its head here to be honest, after all, heterosexuals (and, indeed homosexuals) have access to sexual gratification online without any real stigma attached to it these days, the same cannot be said for pedophiles, for very obvious reasons. There's been evidence that access to porn has reduced sexual assaults (though it has also had other, negative effects such as unrealistic expectations), but you simply cannot apply that kind of thinking with regards to this particular issue, so I really don't know the solution to that problem.

This once again argues that pedophilia is a sexual orientation, which it is not, making more of those insulting false equivalences.

I made no such claims. I don't care whether you want to call it "sexual orientations" or "things somebody might be attracted to"; regardless what name you give it
{ "women", "men", "children", "inanimate objects",   . . . }
Any of them can be plugged into this template sentence

I am sexually attracted to <blank>, and yet can work in an environment with <blank> and not sexually assault any of them

And this one

People who find themselves sexually attracted to <blank> should not be prevented from accessing pornography of <blank>¹, because doing so will lead to increased sexual assaults on <blank>.

¹Provided it's something that isn't "enabling". In case I didn't state this explicitly enough earlier: lolicon is not "enabling".

Yes, I am telling you not to say that pedophilia can be dealt with entirely by just suppressing your urges. I'm not saying you can't say it; I'm saying you shouldn't, because it's wrong, and spreading misinformation is always harmful, and in this case the end harm could be child abuse, and I don't want that.

I certainly hope the percentage of people who read this thread that are "pedophiles who might have sought treatment, but decided not to" is 0%. I'm not saying your specific post is likely to be the cause of that... but it does contribute to a general atmosphere, perpetuating misinformation, which somebody might then perpetuate somewhere else, to be seen by someone else, who may or may not spread that idea further... the ultimate impact is impossible to know (and could very well be "none whatsoever"). However, one can guarantee no negative impact by not spreading misinformation in the first place, no?

It is not misinformation. There exist cases where pedophilia is not harmful to anyone. Those cases, those people, do not need "help".