For discussion: If you were a pedophile

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by sean

The bottom line is whether or not you can accept that a paedophile can be a good person and speak honestly about his life and experiences.

I think they can do this very well from the inside of a jail cell or a mental institution.

[DanaC]

Hypothetically speaking Merc, if someone has never harmed a child and never will harm a child, but feels attracted to them (by whatever quirk of fate), are you really suggesting that by that unsought desire alone they 'deserve' to be locked away for life?

[sean]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Sean, in your experience with the pedophilic community, how many would you estimate have biological children of their own? Does being presented with this fundamentally different relationship with a child change anything for those who have them, or does it make no difference?

Most of my knowledge of other paedophiles comes from research on published sources, but I think paedophiles are widely acknowledged to be a distinct population to incestuous parents and unlikely to offend against their own children. I think many paedophiles have adult partners and children. Perhaps this gives them easier access to children, perhaps it normalizes their attitudes, who knows. Sexual life histories are seldom completely dictated by primary orientation.

I can accept that possibility. I cannot, however, accept this one:

Like black swans, positive childhood sexual experiences with adults do occur, however rarely.

It isn't particularly important to me whether you accept that reality or not, it's a widely acknowledged fact even among professionals working in sexual abuse prevention.

My lifestyle, and ethos, and habits are all focused around not having any kind of sexual contact with children. What I think about such contacts is really academic, and not relevant to my claim to acceptance. Like anyone, I have a right to my opinion.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Hypothetically speaking Merc, if someone has never harmed a child and never will harm a child, but feels attracted to them (by whatever quirk of fate), are you really suggesting that by that unsought desire alone they 'deserve' to be locked away for life?

No, not at all. But they should be prevented from ever having the chance of having close contact with children. You can never tell who will act upon impulses of a deep sexual nature and who will not. I feel the same about men who have fantasies of rape of women. If we can ID these people early we should monitor their behavior. There is no way in hell you or anyone else is going to convince me that a person with sexual feelings towards children, who has acted on them or not, is not a danger to children. Such persons need therapy and careful monitoring. Like anyone, I have a right to my opinion. These people are an inherent danger to society IMHO.

[DanaC]

Ok. I think that's a fair view. Though, I think there is often a huge difference between men who have sexual fantasies around rape and those who actually want to rape (lots of people enjoy fantasies of control and dominance, up to and including rape, both in terms of being in control and in terms of being controlled).

So, do you think those people, who have this unchosen desire, but have never actually hurt anyone, should be treated with cruelty and disdain?

[sean]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Sean: I have to disagree with your analysis of the societal nature of the harm ... However lovingly that relationship is forged (if we hypothetically place ourselves into a society which does not deem it intrinsically wrong) the power difference between an adult and a child is vast. ... Emotional maturity is an essential component of understanding one's sexual self, and without emotional maturity a person has less understanding of what they want/need, and what they don't want/need. ...

That said, I don't see anything 'evil' in being attracted to children. I do think society's red line on acting on that attraction sexually is well placed tho:P

I can sympathise with what you're saying DanaC, and I realise it seems intuitive, but much of it won't stand close scrutiny.

It's not something I really want to get into in depth becos it isn't really important to me. However harmless adult/child sex might be in the absence of social factors, there is no such thing as an absence of social factors, and current attitudes are unlikely to change in my lifetime. I'm more interested in not having to hide or be ashamed of my orientation, and in having people understand and accept me. Justifying sex with children is unlikely to contribute to that goal.

That said, sexual conduct between adults and juveniles has been elevated in numerous cultures and is common in many other species. There's no evidence that it is intrinsically harmful. Your power analysis (which incidentally derives from Foucault, who was an advocate of paedophilia) applies equally to the power imbalance between the state and the 'sex offender'. It also ignores the power imbalance which forces the child to attend school, where he is bullied and bored, and church, where he is indoctrinated. If the child's body is so inviolate, why do we allow circumcision? If 'emotional maturity' is necessary to participate in sexual pleasure, does this mean sex between children is harmful?

Its never so simple as you think.

Given all that, I think there are psychological risks for children in being sexually involved with adults. I think the childhood tasks of learning boundaries and identity formation can be disrupted by intense kinds of intimacy. I also think an adult is always in a sense 'in loco parentis' in any relationship with a child, and I think there is a role conflict and an incestuous component to any romantic involvement.

The difference is, I don't see these as absolute and definitive factors, they are simply things that need to be considered. I would certainly say there are good reasons why adult/child sex is forbidden in our culture, but there is no good reason for the kind of anaphylactic hyperbole displayed by TheMercenary. Children have always held an erotic appeal for adults. That appeal isn't limited to paedophiles. We need to be more realistic about it, because the current ideology of the sanctified child, pristine as an alter cloth and fragile as a damselfly, is harming our culture and harming children. It's also turning me and people like me into scapegoats for the feelings that almost everybody has and failures almost everybody is guilty of. Such is the role of the scapegoat.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Ok. I think that's a fair view. Though, I think there is often a huge difference between men who have sexual fantasies around rape and those who actually want to rape (lots of people enjoy fantasies of control and dominance, up to and including rape, both in terms of being in control and in terms of being controlled).

Fair again. But the issues of fantasy and control between consenting adults is a far different issue of those between a consenting adult and a child, don't you think? At what age do the children have the ability to discriminate between appropriate feelings of sexual desire for others and the pressure that a supposed superior adult figure has in their sphere of influence and understanding, including their current level of psychological development. (Given that children mature at different rates).

So, do you think those people, who have this unchosen desire, but have never actually hurt anyone, should be treated with cruelty and disdain?

You assume that treatment is cruel and filled with disdain. For adults it depends. For children and those whom have sexual feelings for them, yes I have no problem treating them with disdain. I do not believe that you can mix the sexual feelings of adults with those adults have for children and call them equal and equipotent.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Fair again. But the issues of fantasy and control between consenting adults is a far different issue of those between a consenting adult and a child, don't you think? At what age do the children have the ability to discriminate between appropriate feelings of sexual desire for others and the pressure that a supposed superior adult figure has in their sphere of influence and understanding, including their current level of psychological development. (Given that children mature at different rates).

That's why I put that in parenthesis, to mark it out as a separate point relating to your point about men who fantasize about rape. I do not see it as in anyway the same. I have already stated very clearly earlier in the discussion that I do not believe children are competant to make such decisions.

You assume that treatment is cruel and filled with disdain.

Actually no, I don't. I do however think you have treated sean with cruelty and disdain.

For children and those whom have sexual feelings for them, yes I have no problem treating them with disdain.

This I have difficulty with. Having feelings is not something we choose. It's not a decision made. One can decide not to act upon those feelings. One can decide to act upon them. One can decide to spend one's life in celibacy and one can decide to pray to God every day to free yourself from such desire and temptations. But we really don't get to choose what turns us on. We can hate it in ourselves and do everything we can to try and block it out. But we cannot choose what instinctively provokes desire in us.

Disdain for anyone's unchosen psychosexual make-up just makes no sense to me.

[TheMercenary]

It is only fair at this point to tell you of my bias.

I was a Peds ICU nurse from 1978 to1982. In that time frame I have seen no less than 10 men arrested at the bedside in the hospital for sexual abuse and first degree murder.

I have to admit that I have no understanding and empathy for any man who admits to a sexual attraction to a child. I believe they should be isolated and if they commit a crime of sexual abuse against a child, they should be put to death.

[DanaC]

@ sean: I very much do not ignore the power relations between state and child. I have a real problem with the dichotomy between the potential disadvantages which fall onto poorer children if school is not compulsory and the equally worrying potential for harm to children's development which comes from being forced to attend school. I also am an atheist and am not at all comfortable with the power of religious indoctrination, in particular where it relates to psycho-sexual development and gender identities.

I do believe sex between children can be emotionally damaging yes. That doesn;t mean I think it is always emotionally damaging. Just that the risk is greater where emotional maturity has not yet been reached. I had sex when I was too young to have sex. It wasn't abuse. It was probably no worse than most other people's early fumbles. But I think it would have served me better to wait until i was mature enough to take/demand from that situation what I wanted/needed.

I don't think it is at all simple *smiles*. And attitudes towards sex (in every conceivable way, if you'll pardon the pun) are extrenely fluid. The emphasis on penetrative sex as the central act within heterosexual couples can be traced very firmly to the eighteenth century. Attitudes towards sex and sexuality have gone through profound changes accross many generations.

I don't doubt that it is theoretically possible for a child to have a positive sexual experience with an adult. I daresay it has happened and will happen again. Humans have been around for a fuck of a long time and we have tried every combination. I do not see this as something which exists outside of nature, but something which occurs naturally within it.

The thing with the sanctified child is an interesting one. Again that is something that traces its roots to the eighteenth century (actually elements of it started to come up during the previous century, but it really started to take off in the latter half of the 18th). What we have now, and have had at various points since, is a bizarre combination of highly sexualised imagery around girls (young girls fashions and media, the made-up girls in pageants) at the same time as they are sanctified to the point of hysteria.

You'll have to forgive us somewhat Sean. It is something most of us, even if we are willing to try to understand, never truly can. But as you say, that perhaps is not the best way to gain acceptance anyway.

Oh, and Merc is like that with lots of people. It's difficult to see sometimse, but under that harsh, cruel, belligerent and occasionally downright nasty exterior, he's ... well, he's harsh, cruel, belligerent and downright nasty...

I jest. He isn't really:P

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

It is only fair at this point to tell you of my bias.

I was a Peds ICU nurse from 1978 to1982. In that time frame I have seen no less than 10 men arrested at the bedside in the hospital for sexual abuse and first degree murder.

I have to admit that I have no understanding and empathy for any man who admits to a sexual attraction to a child. I believe they should be isolated and if they commit a crime of sexual abuse against a child, they should be put to death.

I can understand that merc. I can see how that might affect how you approach this subject.

I have many friends who've been abused. It's ridiculously common. I believe the current estimate is that one in nine children will at some point in their childhood suffer some sort of sexual abuse. I think most women, in particular know other women who have talked about such abuse and confided. My best friend at school was abused by her uncle. I was her confidante, and I also have certain instinctive responses to the question of abuse.

But I still cannot fathom disdain for someone's unchosen desire or sexual orientation. Whatever I think of that desire.

[sean]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

It is only fair at this point to tell you of my bias.

I was a Peds ICU nurse from 1978 to1982. In that time frame I have seen no less than 10 men arrested at the bedside in the hospital for sexual abuse and first degree murder.

I have to admit that I have no understanding and empathy for any man who admits to a sexual attraction to a child. I believe they should be isolated and if they commit a crime of sexual abuse against a child, they should be put to death.

Your bias was more obvious before you told me you were a nurse. Why were the men arrested for sexual abuse in an ICU? I can only assume they were there as a consequence of vigilantism, which is something you clearly seem to approve of.

It seems ironic that you should be quoting Nietzsche, becos what you are advocating for paedophiles is to deny them any personal agency or burden of responsibility. These are the very resources paedophiles need to affirm in themselves in order to resolve the conflicts in their lives.

As you say, your lack of empathy is a consequence of your lack of understanding, but before you ease your discomfort by baying for my blood, you have a moral obligation to seek that understanding. I'm an ordinary human being, just like you are. I've probably performed as many honorable, selfless acts as you have, and altho I accept you find it hard to trust me, I don't accept you have the right, or the cause, to hate me.

[DanaC]

Merc hates everyone. He's an equal opportunities hater

*Sticks tongue out at Merc*

[jinx]

Sean, is there any chance you would describe for us your first sexual encounter? Ie. were you molested?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by sean

Your bias was more obvious before you told me you were a nurse. Why were the men arrested for sexual abuse in an ICU? I can only assume they were there as a consequence of vigilantism, which is something you clearly seem to approve of.

vigilantism? Absolutely, note. Are you afraid of that? Is there a reason that you should even bring the subject up? Do you support the sexual exploitation of children? Are you now, or have you ever been a member of any organization that supports or condones the sexual exploitation of children? Let us all know where you stand so we can move forward in this discussion....

It seems ironic that you should be quoting Nietzsche, becos what you are advocating for paedophiles is to deny them any personal agency or burden of responsibility. These are the very resources paedophiles need to affirm in themselves in order to resolve the conflicts in their lives.

As you say, your lack of empathy is a consequence of your lack of understanding, but before you ease your discomfort by baying for my blood, you have a moral obligation to seek that understanding. I'm an ordinary human being, just like you are. I've probably performed as many honorable, selfless acts as you have, and altho I accept you find it hard to trust me, I don't accept you have the right, or the cause, to hate me.

I say we just cut the head off of the snake. I have no moral obligation as defined by you or anyone else for anything, you do not have the right or ability to define that. If you have sexual feelings for children you are sick human being that needs help or should you should be eliminated.