Silverrida
Moon
Infinity - So far away yet around us at the same time
Posts: 112
|
Post by Silverrida on Apr 3, 2010 16:14:11 GMT -5
Pedophilia is considered wrong in most circumstances. I am against acts of it, but I am okay with your definition of passive pedophilia, mainly because it is something that cannot be helped. Sexual interests develop based on a combination of nature and nurture, but the majority of influence is in the nature section, and slight hormone imbalances that are regulated by control genes. So I agree with your first opening thought and accept the second opening thought as an inevitability that should be okay.
Your third thought, however, is already answered to a degree. Adulthood is at the age of 18. There is no reason to change that because those who are sexually mature early other have some sort of disorder, probably dealing with too much testosterone or estrogen, or they are close enough to the cap that they can wait it out.
With your forth thought, I already agreed with you on passive pedophilia. I believe using children to make child pornography is one of the most immoral things you can do. I believe owning such pornography would help that person overcome certain urges. However, the problem is that owning such a source encourages making more, which as I said is immoral. Therefore I believe it should remain illegal.
Your fifth thought can be thrown out. A human beings mind is developing all the way though, I believe, mid-20's. Any consensual sex before it is mostly developed, at around the age of 17-19, can be considered manipulation and it should be as the child does not fully comprehend what a sexual experience is supposed to convey or how it is supposed to happen.
|
|
RabbitWho
Star
Rebecca - How 'bout we all put or real names somewhere in our signatures or titles? [SKB:]
Posts: 808
|
Post by RabbitWho on Apr 3, 2010 16:20:36 GMT -5
Point 5: No such thing as consensual sex with a minor. Point 3: The cut off point is debatable, in the Czech Republic it's 14 (for 14 year olds with each other, not with adults) in England its 16, Ireland 17, don't know about you guys in America. "Sexual maturity" is irrelevant, a girl can get her period and be ready to have babies at 9, her mind is not ready and cannot be. Point 4: Child pornography is usually an act of abuse in itself, the children are often kidnapped and trafficked, or abused by a parent themselves. Paying for it is supporting this and literally financing it. It is right to be a prison sentence because it causes harm to come to a child, maybe not the same one as you are looking at, but the next one.
I know that no one can control their sexual preference. No one can stop themselves feeling the way they do, and usually people who feel this way were abused themselves as children. There are many people who feel this way and never allow themselves to hurt a child or to be around children. If anyone reading this has feelings like this do not be afraid, you need to see a councilor and you need to see one for the rest of your life. It is not your fault, but it is something you are stuck with.
But people always have control over their own actions and they need to be held accountable. If their abuser has left them so messed up that they can't fathom the concept of "consent" properly then they need to be kept away from other people.
The fact is that any one of us or our children could end up with this mindset as an adult if we were kidnapped and went through this hell. So I feel a huge amount of pity for these people. But society can't let the hell spread. Of course there are people who experience it and never end up that way themselves, I'm not sure what makes the difference.
|
|
RabbitWho
Star
Rebecca - How 'bout we all put or real names somewhere in our signatures or titles? [SKB:]
Posts: 808
|
Post by RabbitWho on Apr 3, 2010 16:24:03 GMT -5
There is no reason to change that because those who are sexually mature early other have some sort of disorder, probably dealing with too much testosterone or estrogen, or they are close enough to the cap that they can wait it out. . Woah... Everyone I ever met as a teenager had "some sort of disorder". Amazing.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Apr 3, 2010 16:24:41 GMT -5
There is a definite difference between a paedophile, ephebophile and a child molester.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2010 16:26:45 GMT -5
Point 5: No such thing as consensual sex with a minor. Point 3: The cut off point is debatable, in the Czech Republic it's 14 (for 14 year olds with each other, not with adults) in England its 16, Ireland 17, don't know about you guys in America. "Sexual maturity" is irrelevant, a girl can get her period and be ready to have babies at 9, her mind is not ready and cannot be. Point 4: Child pornography is usually an act of abuse in itself, the children are often kidnapped and trafficked, or abused by a parent themselves. Paying for it is supporting this and literally financing it. It is right to be a prison sentence because it causes harm to come to a child, maybe not the same one as you are looking at, but the next one. I know that no one can control their sexual preference. No one can stop themselves feeling the way they do, and usually people who feel this way were abused themselves as children. There are many people who feel this way and never allow themselves to hurt a child or to be around children. If anyone reading this has feelings like this do not be afraid, you need to see a councilor and you need to see one for the rest of your life. It is not your fault, but it is something you are stuck with. But people always have control over their own actions and they need to be held accountable. If their abuser has left them so messed up that they can't fathom the concept of "consent" properly then they need to be kept away from other people. The fact is that any one of us or our children could end up with this mindset as an adult if we were kidnapped and went through this hell. So I feel a huge amount of pity for these people. But society can't let the hell spread. Of course there are people who experience it and never end up that way themselves, I'm not sure what makes the difference. you put my exact thoughts on this into words. thanks, now I don't have to type that much
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2010 16:29:07 GMT -5
Your third thought, however, is already answered to a degree. Adulthood is at the age of 18. There is no reason to change that because those who are sexually mature early other have some sort of disorder, probably dealing with too much testosterone or estrogen, or they are close enough to the cap that they can wait it out. this is ridiculous.. The age people in our society have sex with the intention of having babies is actually way too late. This is mainly for women, as naturally speaking, their peak of fertility is between 17 and 22 or so..
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Apr 3, 2010 16:32:00 GMT -5
Point 5: No such thing as consensual sex with a minor. Not legally, anyway. Now here's an interesting issue. If, in one place the age of consent was 16, and in another, the age of consent was 18; then a girl who is 17 years of age has consensual sexual relations with someone 20 years of age. In one place, it's considered consensual, in the other it's not considered consensual on the basis of age and therefore statutory rape. The girl's age hasn't changed and neither has her agreement with the activity.
|
|
Silverrida
Moon
Infinity - So far away yet around us at the same time
Posts: 112
|
Post by Silverrida on Apr 3, 2010 16:39:13 GMT -5
There is no reason to change that because those who are sexually mature early other have some sort of disorder, probably dealing with too much testosterone or estrogen, or they are close enough to the cap that they can wait it out. . Woah... Everyone I ever met as a teenager had "some sort of disorder". Amazing. or they are close enough to the cap that they can wait it out.this is ridiculous.. The age people in our society have sex with the intention of having babies is actually way too late. This is mainly for women, as naturally speaking, their peak of fertility is between 17 and 22 or so.. 18 would fall into that age group. Also, keep in mind that 18 is only the USA's standard of adulthood but the age is generally around there +- 2 years. I forgot to include my ideas on consensual sex between two people near the same age and near "adulthood" but not quite there yet. I am okay with this as I do not see anyone taking advantage, purposely, of anyone else. I do not see it being appropriate with a much older man, which is what I was addressing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2010 16:41:02 GMT -5
yeah, but you're saying that they have a disorder when they are sexually interested/active earlier, and that just plain SHIRT imo.
|
|
Silverrida
Moon
Infinity - So far away yet around us at the same time
Posts: 112
|
Post by Silverrida on Apr 3, 2010 16:44:13 GMT -5
yeah, but you're saying that they have a disorder when they are sexually interested/active earlier, and that just plain SHIRT imo. You're telling me that you don't think someone between the ages of, let's say, 4-12 being actively sexual or looking for sex have some sort of hormone imbalance? That is how I am using the term disorder. I do not mean in a vast sense, just an imbalance that is different from the average.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Apr 3, 2010 16:46:52 GMT -5
I really don't think it's a matter of age when it comes to consensual sex. I really don't have a problem with two fourteen year olds having sexual relations, or even a fourteen and a sixteen year old.
|
|
RabbitWho
Star
Rebecca - How 'bout we all put or real names somewhere in our signatures or titles? [SKB:]
Posts: 808
|
Post by RabbitWho on Apr 3, 2010 16:50:14 GMT -5
yeah, but you're saying that they have a disorder when they are sexually interested/active earlier, and that just plain SHIRT imo. You're telling me that you don't think someone between the ages of, let's say, 4-12 being actively sexual or looking for sex have some sort of hormone imbalance? That is how I am using the term disorder. I do not mean in a vast sense, just an imbalance that is different from the average. That's not what you said first at all. If a child were to enjoy it, would it be right, or at least less wrong? Do you have any idea how many assumptions I can make about you from that question? I am not a psychologist and I cannot help you. But I can tell you that no child can enjoy this. If you truly believe it is possible then you have some problems. I'm leaving this discussion alone now.
|
|
Silverrida
Moon
Infinity - So far away yet around us at the same time
Posts: 112
|
Post by Silverrida on Apr 3, 2010 16:53:39 GMT -5
Thank you [to silverrida - there were loads of comments written while I was writing this response, so apologies] for your thorough and thoughtful response, and for stating some fundamentals that I failed to, such as how passive paedophilia is not a choice. You didn't engage with the very basic issue of whether an act of paedophilia is wrong, stating your belief that it simply is wrong, however. This is a fundamental issue. We have all heard the stories of people who were "sexually abused" as a child, but what exactly constitutes "abused"? If a child were to enjoy it, would it be right, or at least less wrong? Interestingly, you seem to have a very high age bar for acceptable sex. In Britain, the age of consent is 16, and one of the reasons for outcry at the recent "Jazz Lady" scandal was that the child was 15 and 8 months, and she apparently seduced her teacher, the adult. Also, where does this leave sexual acts between children? We may have some image in our heads of 50-year-old priests, but what about between two 15-year-olds? Or two 12-year-olds? The idea of the age of consent is that before it, children do not possess the ability to fully engage with the situation, owing to a lack of knowledge and understanding, grounded on their hormonal development. I disagree here; we were "fancying" people at school as early as 7, and however real this may have been, it is not this that must "move up", but sexual education that must "move down" (in terms of years). I therefore disagree with your responses to my third and fifth thoughts. Your response to my fourth thought I largely agree with, though I would dispute your claim that ownership of child porn encourages more. If it is downloaded for free, how would it encourage more creation? Starting with your first paragraph. I believe it is wrong because it is taking advantage of children whose minds aren't necessarily developed enough or ready to accept sex. Weather they enjoy it or not is not the issue, the issue is taking advantage of a developing child. This is why I see it as immoral, although most children tend to dislike it since they are generally forced to do so. Those who are not and are consensual are still developing and have the possibility of being manipulated, and may likely not enjoy it either. Those who are consensual are generally older, around 13-15/16 using the UK's limit, and I am okay with it if the ages are similar as there is no purposeful manipulation going on. Your second point I addressed in a recent comment. I just used the USA's limit cap for adulthood. I think sexual behavior is alright before 18 if it's between two children who are near the same age where no manipulation is occuring. And, of course, if they actually care about each other, as doing it just for sex at that age can lead to things like nymphomania. The third point is basically opinion based. I do not believe a 10 year old has developed enough to make a serious decision like this, you seem to. There is no debate here as it is opinion based. Your forth point would be correct if child porn was only downloaded online. It is not. Nor is it always "free". Advertisements allow almost anyone to get money for people visiting their site, bringing more income, bringing more incentive.
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Apr 3, 2010 16:54:34 GMT -5
If a child were to enjoy it, would it be right, or at least less wrong? Do you have any idea how many assumptions I can make about you from that question? I am not a psychologist and I cannot help you. But I can tell you that no child can enjoy this. If you truly believe it is possible then you have some problems. I'm leaving this discussion alone now. Wait, I think I know the problem here. This discussion is divided into different points: - Actual child molestation - The existence of paedophilia - Age of consent Now, I think that Rabbitwho is taking Gafro's point the wrong way. It appears as if Rabbitwho is under the impression that Gafro is referring to like an older individual taking advantage of a very young child (example, maybe a seven year old girl) and proceeding with rape. However, I do think that Gafro may be referring to two subjects closer in age and maturity, but split by the law. Say, a nineteen year old man and a fifteen year old girl. The "child" (or minor as they would legally be referred to) in this situation may want to have sexual relations with the adult. At this point, I think that there is an abstract region of maturity around or after puberty in which a person is able to make a decision like this.
|
|
Silverrida
Moon
Infinity - So far away yet around us at the same time
Posts: 112
|
Post by Silverrida on Apr 3, 2010 16:57:50 GMT -5
You're telling me that you don't think someone between the ages of, let's say, 4-12 being actively sexual or looking for sex have some sort of hormone imbalance? That is how I am using the term disorder. I do not mean in a vast sense, just an imbalance that is different from the average. That's not what you said first at all. That is exactly what I said at first, I just didn't specify where the close enough mark was. I don't see how I said anything else unless you interpreted where I said close enough, which I bolded in a different response, as being close to out of your teens. I also later provided a post of what I think about sex between two people near the same age yet still underage.
|
|
Silverrida
Moon
Infinity - So far away yet around us at the same time
Posts: 112
|
Post by Silverrida on Apr 3, 2010 17:08:02 GMT -5
Starting with your first paragraph. I believe it is wrong because it is taking advantage of children whose minds aren't necessarily developed enough or ready to accept sex. Weather they enjoy it or not is not the issue, the issue is taking advantage of a developing child. This is why I see it as immoral, although most children tend to dislike it since they are generally forced to do so. Those who are not and are consensual are still developing and have the possibility of being manipulated, and may likely not enjoy it either. Those who are consensual are generally older, around 13-15/16 using the UK's limit, and I am okay with it if the ages are similar as there is no purposeful manipulation going on. Your second point I addressed in a recent comment. I just used the USA's limit cap for adulthood. I think sexual behavior is alright before 18 if it's between two children who are near the same age where no manipulation is occuring. And, of course, if they actually care about each other, as doing it just for sex at that age can lead to things like nymphomania. The third point is basically opinion based. I do not believe a 10 year old has developed enough to make a serious decision like this, you seem to. There is no debate here as it is opinion based. Your forth point would be correct if child porn was only downloaded online. It is not. Nor is it always "free". Advertisements allow almost anyone to get money for people visiting their site, bringing more income, bringing more incentive. 1st. Why would "taking advantage" of them necessarily be wrong, however? If, as in the case of the Jazz Lady, the child was doing the seducing, isn't the child taking advantage of the adult's paedophilia, which would presumably be quite undersatisfied (to put it bluntly) 3rd. I don't think that there is one age that can be applied to all, I'm just not-saying that it is impossible for a 10 year old. I'm not committing myself on that front yet. 4th. Thank you for this one; your point about the advertising has informed my opinion. Taking advantage of a developing child is completely morally wrong. It is something you do not do. That is an ultimatum. You have no right to disturb a developing child. Your example is the excetion that proves the rule. If you see that kind of manipulation as wrong, which I do, then it can be seen as 10 times as wrong when a fully developed adult does the same to an undeveloped child, which is the opposite of the situation you showed. And really, how often does that kind of case come up? You can't change everything based on one incident. And I agree with your third point. The age definitely varies from person to person. The reason I suggest being older is because there have been studies that show development doesn't end till far later than what would be considered "legal" in any country. Of course, there are some outliers to this. It all depends on the specific person.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2010 17:17:46 GMT -5
That's not what you said first at all. That is exactly what I said at first, I just didn't specify where the close enough mark was. I don't see how I said anything else unless you interpreted where I said close enough, which I bolded in a different response, as being close to out of your teens. I also later provided a post of what I think about sex between two people near the same age yet still underage. yes you did.. you said that people who were sexually active under the age of 18 have a disorder..
|
|
Silverrida
Moon
Infinity - So far away yet around us at the same time
Posts: 112
|
Post by Silverrida on Apr 3, 2010 17:20:12 GMT -5
Taking advantage of a developing child is completely morally wrong. It is something you do not do. That is an ultimatum. You have no right to disturb a developing child. Yes but why? (I think you mean "axiom" not "ultimatum" by the way, but I get your meaning) You say that it's a given, but why is it a given? Aren't we always developing, for our whole lives? Why is sex at one point okay, and sex a little earlier not okay? And I reiterate my question: if an act of paedophilia were, hypothetically, to cause no harm, would it still be wrong? That's why I said Ultimatum. I have no proof of it. I am not saying it is something that must be accepted with no proof, as an axiom is, but I am saying that it is something that should be accepted. I can see where the confusion lies, in fact my idea of an ultimatum might be off entirely, but enough semantics. Interfering with someone who is developing always takes away something. Even in teaching, biases are taught, ass the teacher will be bias, and even if they are not the book will be. That form of manipulation is unpreventable. Molestation is. That is exactly what I said at first, I just didn't specify where the close enough mark was. I don't see how I said anything else unless you interpreted where I said close enough, which I bolded in a different response, as being close to out of your teens. I also later provided a post of what I think about sex between two people near the same age yet still underage. yes you did.. you said that people who were sexually active under the age of 18 have a disorder.. Or close enough to the cap that they would be able to wait it out. Adding on to the end of that sentence, I can also add "with a person over the legal age limit", as I pretty much did in a separate post. The problem was I didn't adequately define close enough, as I already said. I defined close enough at around 13-[insert legal age here].
|
|
Silverrida
Moon
Infinity - So far away yet around us at the same time
Posts: 112
|
Post by Silverrida on Apr 3, 2010 17:46:36 GMT -5
1. As we get older, our mental development actually stops, at least in the area of our mind choosing morals and what is right or wrong. Although morals may change, you definitely have the ability to think through everything and change accordingly. As a child, not everyone has this skill. We have an obligation to those who do not have said skills to think things over VERY intently that they shall be protected.
2. And manipulation does take away something. I guess if it literally had no effect, which is impossible, then it would be fine as it would literally have NO effect.
3. I can agree with you here to a certain extent, but this is opinionated and we will draw different conclusions. I think that it is easily okay for a nineteen year old to have sex with a seventeen year old as they are close in age and no it is likely that no purposeful manipulation is happening (Note: this is considering 18 years old to be legal). However, this is a very thin line. It is very hard to get ages further and further apart and still define which are moral and which are not. At what age is old enough to be purposely manipulating someone with the knowledge that they won't realize what is happening? At what age are you too young to make the mental decision that you are ready for sex?
|
|
|
Post by stephen5000 on Apr 4, 2010 0:00:59 GMT -5
This is a tough topic.
I generally loathe laws based on age, but it seems in this case it's a necessary evil. Basically, kids are easy to coerce into doing things they don't really want to - and to think they made the decision themselves. Really, everything should be taken on a case-by-case basis, but again that's difficult and unfeasible from a legal standpoint.
I'd argue that active pedophilia is morally wrong from the standpoint that prepubescent children aren't ready for sex. The problem really arises in determining whether said child has matured enough or not.
One thing that hasn't gotten much mention in the above discussion that I thought needed addressing is the relationship between the child and the sexual partner. As I said above, children can be easily coerced, so I'd recommend against sexual relationship with a person in authority, even if the child is of legal age.
(Frankly I think sexual relationships where one person has some sort of authority over the other are a bad idea even if children aren't involved)
Authority figures can include family members, baby sitters, teachers and other school employees, etc. Really teachers should know better and practice restraint when it comes to relationships with students, at the very least waiting for the kid to graduate before doing anything serious.
|
|