Sexual Orientation

[Violet]

The reason why I think pedophillia is wrong is because the adult typically pursues it for reasons of narcissistic gratification and has little if any concern over the effects on the pliant -- or unwilling -- child.

Sexual activity is often primarily engaged in for its self-gratification purposes. We're a selfish people.

As to the 'unwilling' factor... that would constitute rape, childhood notwithstanding.

The child, on the other hand , is less likely to be able see the pedophile's real motives, and is therefore more vulnerable and less able to give informed consent.

Please define for me 'informed consent' as you're using it? Children are vulnerable and ignorant, sure... but then, so are the religious adults, and any person who has ever put their trust in another.

Pedophilia is an act that almost always results in psychological harm to the child, it seems to me. And I think "better safe than sorry" is a fair approach when it comes to something as vague as "when is a child able to give informed consent?"

Paedophiles have to come to grips with the fact that society thinks they are monsters, even just for wanting. Sex between children and adults suffers for the negative perception of such... and there are more reasons it becomes negative more often than not. These include the following, but are not limited to:

Human Trafficking.
Arranged Marriages.
Sick cultural norms (afghani warlord taking a boy on the side, the general perception of women's roles in islamic states)
Religious Manipulation.
Other abuses of power and/or jurisdiction.
General rapes that would be rapes regardless of statutory rape existing or not.

I think "when they have demonstrated their capabilities" is a better approach. We're all different in many senses... we learn differently, we live differently, we grow differently, we age differently, and we see life differently. I despise vague separators of persons' rights, and I despise irrelevant separators (such as 'age lines').

Until some very wide-sweeping social perception and legal observation changes are made... there will be no light upon any positive stories/experiences of paedophilia, which exist, but would be snuffed out for all the media has really cared about paedophilia (heck, there are a number even on this forum, and from a time before A69 existed, I mean (Not to forget that coming clean about paedophilia is pretty much a jail sentence)).

Sort of like how it wasn't until AIDS was shown to be transmitted through straight-people-sex that AIDS stopped being god's justice for gay people having sex... Or how patriotism is bolstered by all the negative stories of what's happening <wherever>, because that shit sells, and nobody is interested in reading about how <wherever> is currently in the greatest era of peace it's ever experienced

[Thumpalumpacus]

Sexual activity is often primarily engaged in for its self-gratification purposes. We're a selfish people.

Of course. But I think we'll both agree that in a partnership of equals, the gratification of both partners counts. In an imbalanced relationship such as is most often seen in cases of pedophilia, the gratification of the adult is the preeminent concern, and the effects on the child are not considered at all by the adult.

As to the 'unwilling' factor... that would constitute rape, childhood notwithstanding.

Of course. But a naive child is that much more vulnerable to manipulation into a situation which could well cause psychological issues lasting well into adulthood.

Please define for me 'informed consent' as you're using it? Children are vulnerable and ignorant, sure... but then, so are the religious adults, and any person who has ever put their trust in another.

I'm using "consent" in the legal sense, and adding the adkective "informed", meaning that the child understands the potential fallout from agreeing to sex. Legally speaking, a child is not able to give consent at all. And giving meaningful consent implies understanding the consequences of one's assent, otherwise the potential of chicanery or manipulation greatly increases.

Paedophiles have to come to grips with the fact that society thinks they are monsters, even just for wanting. Sex between children and adults suffers for the negative perception of such... and there are more reasons it becomes negative more often than not. These include the following, but are not limited to:

Human Trafficking.
Arranged Marriages.
Sick cultural norms (afghani warlord taking a boy on the side, the general perception of women's roles in islamic states)
Religious Manipulation.
Other abuses of power and/or jurisdiction.
General rapes that would be rapes regardless of statutory rape existing or not.

I think "when they have demonstrated their capabilities" is a better approach. We're all different in many senses... we learn differently, we live differently, we grow differently, we age differently, and we see life differently. I despise vague separators of persons' rights, and I despise irrelevant separators (such as 'age lines').

I think disparaging age-lines isn't really realistic in this case. As an earlier poster posted, there must be some cutoff, firstly: infants and toddlers cannot give meaningful assent, and pre-teens likely not as well. Sure, some children are precocious, but laws exist to cover the most common situations, not the exceptions. That's why I think the laws against pedophilia are appropriate: most kids under thirteen or so are more vulnerable to manipulation by adults.

Until some very wide-sweeping social perception and legal observation changes are made... there will be no light upon any positive stories/experiences of paedophilia, which exist, but would be snuffed out for all the media has really cared about paedophilia (heck, there are a number even on this forum, and from a time before A69 existed, I mean).

My experience with it -- I was molested at age four -- was not positive at all, and it was not an instance of forcible rape; I simply didn't know enough to say no or yes, and simply did as I was told. The memory of it sat in the back of my head for years, not denied but not processed, but goddamn, it messed with my head.

Sort of like how it wasn't until AIDS was shown to be transmitted through straight-people-sex that AIDS stopped being god's justice for gay people having sex... Or how patriotism is bolstered by all the negative stories of what's happening <wherever>, because that shit sells, and nobody is interested in reading about how <wherever> is currently in the greatest era of peace it's ever experienced

I get what you're saying: mass-media hype can and does color opinions about this or that issue. But my opinion is not formed by it, as I trust you understand now.

[bennyboy]

In the developed Western world, it's pretty unlikely that pedophilia could ever result in a net benefit for the child. However, in more impoverished countries, the, "fat old white perv" portion of the economy is not insubstantial. It is probably better to learn to kiss a penis than to have your hair fall out and your belly swell from chronic malnutrition.

Also, there are people considered children who really aren't, at least in natural terms. Specifically, there are 13 to 15 year-old girls in Korea who are actively looking for sexual encounters to pay for the things they want in life. I would say the men who engage them are probably emotionally immature, but I wouldn't say they are committing an unforgiveable crime. (and no, I'm not including Korea in the first category, since Koreans' mean income is probably pretty close to that in the US).