I expect simple behaviours here. Friendship, and love. Any advice should be from the perspective of the person asking, not the person giving! We have had to make new membership moderated to combat the huge number of spammers who register
Hey guys! I have been wondering about this topic for some time, so I would like to hear your opinion. It might be a touchy subject, but here it is... Would you say pedophilia is wrong? I mean, the sole act of being sexually attracted to children is evil? I want to clear out that there is a difference between pedophilia (the arousal itself) and pederasty (acting in order to satisfy such impulses). Isn't a pedophile a victim of those thoughts, incapable of suppressing them from his mind. I don't want to offend anyone, but isn't it a bit like gay people? They can't help their sexual preferences it either. Obviously, I'm talking about those who don't consume illegal pornographic material involving underage individuals. I would like to hear what you think.
You pose simple questions, but the answers are complex. First, the definition is complex. A true paedophile is one attracted to children who are pre-pubertal. The media, though, considers anyone attracted to those under the age of sexual consent to be paedophiles. However, the age of sexual consent is a construct from the 1800s and has no relationship with puberty except by coincidence, and varies nation to nation, so it is not a useful guideline in moral terms, though there is a set of precise offences one commits if one tampers with a person under that age. Being sexually attracted to a pre-pubertal child is more incorrect than whatever one defines "wrong" to be. If one assumes attraction to be primarily intended to reproduce the species then being attracted to a person below breeding age is incorrect in that it is pointless. And yet Bonobos will have sex with any age of Bonobo, and, come to that, any sex. So much for intelligent design! However, it accomplishes no end goal except for pure sexual fulfilment We have determined, as a society, that sex with a person under the age of consent is unlawful, and we have delegated this decision to those whom we allow to draft the laws. Thus, certainly in a democracy, we have agreed, at least implicitly, that no such sexual acts are allowed. And yet some children who are pre-pubertal flirt like crazy, or are in some way alluring, perhaps sexually attractive. It is not wrong to be attracted to them, though it is unlawful to do more than be attracted in a very passive manner. I surmise that almost all adult males and many adult females have found at least one child in some manner sexually attractive and that none of them will admit it for fear of reprisals. I argue with your words "Sexual Preference" on the simple basis that sexuality is an orientation. I happen to be homosexual. My preference would be to be heterosexual. Orientation and preference are by no means the same thing even if they occupy the same part of the spectrum of sexuality. Homosexuality is inconvenient in so many ways, though I am stuck with it. I would far prefer to be heterosexual for all of those reasons. But I am aroused by the male not the female. As puberty takes hold the child turns into the man or the woman they will become, slowly. The animal in us wishes to mate with those relevant to our orientation. The society member in us chooses, usually, to allow time to pass until they pass legal age. But our instinct to mate is something we have to suppress actively. Schoolteachers must have an amazing amount of self restraint. So, are you talking of the true paedophile, the one attracted to pre-pubertal children., or are you speaking of what seems to be called the ephebophile, which covers those in and passing through puberty? Or are you talking of both of those? And are we a victim of our desires, or do we choose selective celibacy, almost all of us, to ensure we do not transgress the laws under which we choose to live? If you are attracted to twenty five year olds you are just as bound to keep your hands to yourself unless they grant consent, which is the one thing you may not have sex without.
I'd say it isn't wrong to be attracted to pre-pubertal children. Evil? I don't think so. It is wrong to carry out any sexual contact with kids, and evil. Those of such young age simply aren't ready for sexual situations. They're kids and should be thinking about schoolwork and playing with their friends. Sometimes they do become sexually explorative, and with those of their own age I'd say that's about as normal as things get. But an adult shouldn't be arousing their curiosities or 'initiating' them into sexual thoughts or situations. Like Pink Floyd sang... "Leave them kids alone!" Those attracted to kids can't help how they've developed and what they've ended up attracted to. They can control themselves and not mess with kids. If they can't control themselves, they should seek help. The kids don't need bothered in those ways. Let them develop those aspects of their personality on their own in their own time. As for my own opinion, no, it's not evil or wrong to be attracted to kids, the same sex, or teens, or even animals. Some do say it is evil, however. Animals and kids, now, I have a problem with that. As for animals, so long as I or my pet isn't involved, and the animal isn't harmed, I don't want to know. I don't understand it at all. I suppose that is much how homophobes feel about homosexuality. But I'm not going to stone an animal lover to death over their trysts. When I was in my late thirties, I was accused of being a pedophile and 'grooming' a 17-18 year-old on a website. Yes, I found him attractive and very sexy, but I knew there was nothing real to be had there, just a fascination and attraction that I eventually explained to the guy. Someone decided to invade our privacy and read those PMs, and I was banned for 'grooming' and labeled a pedophile. Funny thing was, the 'victim' and I ended up chatting on Skype for the first time immediately after I was banned there, and getting to know each other even more after the banning. So if I was grooming the guy, the site actually shoved him into my hands instead of protecting him. Go figure. He even left the site in protest. And because he found out they read PMs when no one had even made a complaint, let alone him making one. Anyway, no, I don't think the desire itself is 'evil'. Or the person who has such desires. The act can be called evil, I guess, if you hold to evil/good framework. I don't think the desire is 'wrong', just acting on it. We can't really control our desires, only our actions. In the many years I've been online and writing stories, more than one or two men who've admitted to their predilection for youths. I've been surprised more than once. Mostly due to my writings centering around mostly adolescent and youth stories, I've been taken as a pedophile myself. It's been assumed, and I understand why. Some of the stories were written when I was a teen and in my very early twenties. And I still find the topic of youths in love and lust very fascinating. But I'm not interested in sex with kids. I don't see the sexual interest. I've come to sort of understand it, having talked with more than one actual pedophile, two of which I'd known online for a long time before they informed me of their situation. So I will never consider them evil. Or wrong. They are attracted to kids. I could go into wording and phrasing they use about it, but that would have no point. The point is, the guys sure don't seem evil to me, or wrong, and I'd probably like and trust them if I knew them in real life. So they aren't evil as far as I can discern. None have admitted to any sexual contact with kids, and reassure me they don't want to cross that line, as they know the punishment as well as the harm they could cause to the kid. The fact they don't want to hurt or even scare kids is proof enough they aren't evil. The evil ones are the ones that do carry out such deeds; abduction, rape, molestation. One reason so many of my stories are about youths is those men, who have told me that stories are a way to let off that pressure. They can live out a fantasy without any real-world risks, repercussions, or dangers. If it helps them deal with a desire they can do nothing about and prevent a building up of desires with no other outlet but real-world experiences, then I'm all for that. I'm glad to give them an out that leads them further away from the temptation to do something about their desires. Myself, I'm stuck being attracted to teens and twenty-somethings. The same tastes I had as a young teen. As I've grown older, my tastes simply haven't grown along with me. Don't ask me why. I've talked to more than one shrink about it, unofficially, to no real avail. Other than to learn the words ephebophile and teleiophile, which makes up about half of my sexual desires. I'm also very attracted to college-aged guys who aren't hairy or muscly. Ephebophile refers to those who are attracted to those in puberty, about 14, 15, 16, and teleiophile refers to those attracted to post-pubertal but not fully mature about 17, 18, 19. Now each boy/girl will develop differently at different rates, so these labels are really just for classification. Some 14y.o. look 18, and some 20y.o. look 14. I find age pretty much irrelevant. I'm even really bad at guessing ages in nearly any age group. When I see someone attractive, I just can't guess age. So I'm particularly worried about legalities. But then, I keep to myself and don't go after anyone, so that keeps that problem at bay. And when I do need to find someone to meet and seek out mutual attractions, I stick to bars to further remove any age woes. One case in point, a real cutie at the gas station where I stop on the way to work two or three times a week for gas, cigarettes, or a Subway sub. He started working at the Subway there a few months ago. Tall, lean, sandy-blond hair, round, soft face and features, brown eyes on the edge of hazel, gently curved eyebrows that are very thin, great jaw-line and chin. No acne, no hint of hair above his soft, curvy, salmon lips or on his chin. Cute country-boy accent, very polite, almost sweet, adorable smile and laugh. I won't mention his contours below the belt, but, well... when he turned to get the bread from the cabinet, or leaned against the prep-board as he made my sub... geeze! He seems slightly possibly gay. I guessed his age about fourteen, fifteen at the most, but he had to be sixteen to work there. I felt pretty guilty ogling him as he made my sub. A few weeks ago he moved from the Subway to the gas/convenience store counter, and he has to be eighteen to work there as they sell lottery and cigarettes. Now I buy my cigarettes from him. Very soft hands, very long fingers, very neat cuticles. He still looks fifteen, maybe sixteen at the most to me. Go figure. Either he looks far younger than his age, or I'm just so very, very bad at guessing ages. He's clearly eighteen, but he looks fifteen. So am I a perv? Answer that one. LOL Men my own age are rarely attractive to me. Even when I want them to be, they simply aren't. Some, but so rarely. Why? Who knows? But am I evil? Am I wrong? To the hard-line Christian, I'm a child-loving abomination in addition to a sodomite. And on another side note... men have been attracted to young teen girls since the first young teen girl. Advertising and movies prove that out time and again. Brooke Shields in Blue Lagoon for example. 14! Yet there isn't any big outcry about that. She was perved every time the movie was played in theaters and every time it was played on VHS, then DVD, and now streamed. No outcry or revulsion, and the movie is still available and even on broadcast television. 14 and 15 y.o. female models dominate the media, and men drool over them in droves as they pose in flimsy undergarments or bathing suits or beckon enticingly with pouting lips and bedroom eyes. No biggie. But a guy dares even mention the attractive qualities of even a 17y.o. guy and there's outcry and revulsion and demands for prison time. Double-standard incarnate. Wow, that went long. But I haven't written a story or anything since last weekend and I guess I had a lot of typing stored up and nothing to do tonight. And I get a bit defensive about the subject ever since being declared, and I quote, "An obvious sick pedophile and internet predator who should be banned immediately and the police called on him so he gets locked away and the key thrown away."
Think of all the animals that would have been locked up now if they had to act on our human rules! I saw the next door neighbors' cat who is around 13 years old trying to screw my kitten Saturn, who is 14 weeks old. Its all about animal instincts for the most part but there is a line of moral decency we have to abide by if we are going to call ourselves a civilized species. My argument has always been what can an adult find sexually attractive about a prepubescent boy/girl. But then we are talking in the realms of 5-13 in most cases. Once you start getting to 14,15 and 16 then it becomes a grey area because my friend at work has a 15 year old brother who always boasts about how experienced he is between the sheets. Hot air the words may be but the fact that he talks like that suggests he knows exactly what sexuality is and is probably engaging in it. However as I approach my mid thirties I have found my age preferences to have also changed. To me a 15 year old boy (whatever hot stud he thinks he is) is still a child and does not rev my engine, because I see a child. Sure, I might think he is attractive, hence the comment you sometimes hear "Thats a good looking kid you have there" but the eagerness to engage in sexual intercourse with him is non existent. But, take me back 10 years and I vividly remember being very attracted to a certain male around 16 years old. and its funny... back then I felt that 16 was an almost mature age when I was 25. Go forward again 10 years and now I see 16 as still a child and NOW a 16 year old would do nothing for me simply because my mind has changed its angle or whatever the word is. Besides, I am probably not the best one to comment on this thread because I have always leaned towards older men in general. My last boyfriend before I met my long term partner now was 10 years older than me, in the military and a hairy, macho handsome stud I loved hanging on the end of. I think society gets uptight because the child is supposed to be the pinnicle of innocence and once a person on a certain age interferes with that innocence then the child becomes something else. Also you need to look at the consequences on families when pedophilia is found to be going on. Say if it were YOUR child and he or she came home as a 12 year old (for example) and said, Daddy, my PE teacher was watching me get undressed and rubbing himself in certain places. As a father what would you wish to do to that teacher? Anyone who says they would not have a problem with are either liars or equally disturbed as the teacher. Quite frankly I take a hard line on pedophilia, not because I am brainwashed by society, but because it is fundamentally wrong that a grown man or woman would wish to violate both a child's body and/or their innocence for their own sexual gratification.
Quote: WestcliffWriter wrote on Wed, 13 January 2016 20:07 Say if it were YOUR child and he or she came home as a 12 year old (for example) and said, Daddy, my PE teacher was watching me get undressed and rubbing himself in certain places. As a father what would you wish to do to that teacher? Anyone who says they would not have a problem with are either liars or equally disturbed as the teacher. -- I'm just picking this part. As a father I would not have been pleased. But it is because a teacher is in a special position, one of trust and power, and with special access to my child, not because they may have found him attractive at 12. I hold a teacher, as does the law, to be in a special position. I do not expect them to express in any way their interest in my child. I am far less concerned if the young neighbour lad a few years older than my son finds him interesting. In both of these situations I see my job as a father to be the one of reassuring him that he is good looking and that people will find him attractive, and that there is no reason for him to feel concerned unless this makes him feel uncomfortable. How I react then depends on the way our conversation goes, but the last thing I want to do is to create any sense of being a victim in him. I base this on my own school experiences, in a number of situations At eight, perhaps nine, we, as a class, were all interfered with by a maths master. We took our work up individually to his desk at the front of the class. If we were right he patted our little bottoms, wrong and he squeezed our little bollocks. We ignored it all and thought he was silly. We preferred to be patted to be squeezed. Maths was learned. He was obviously a groper, but no-one was affected, no-one was a victim. At 11 a school friend told us all he was having sex with his older sister. She was about 15/16. He was proud, we were jealous. He seemed a well rounded, well adjusted lad. Under the law he was a victim, she was a predator. He said she had sex with him because he could not ejaculate. It was safe. We giggled. At 14 I was propositioned by my classics teacher. He explained that "Greek masters like small boys with blond hair and blue eyes." a few months later he asked me "Will you be my call boy?" It was in public, and he could explain it away, but he made my flesh crawl. I discussed it with my friends, and we agreed it was creepy. I never told my parents. My father would have probably gone ballistic, but it was not of a grade of event that required parents in orbit. Today I would endorse child-me's actions if he came to me as a parent. That is his non actions. I would, however, have a discussion with the patting and squeezing gentleman to explain that this behaviour would cease at once. Now, no-one, except, presumably, my friend and his sister has had sex here. But we do, technically, have three potential paedophiles, or, rather, two and one who seems to have expressed a strange desire for an under age boy (homosexuality was illegal in those days, by the way, there was no age of consent).
I find Timmy's experiences rather interesting, for they show a child or a young adolescent does not need to be seen necessarily as a "victim" even in the presence of some sort of titillation or groping. More generally, kids discover sexuality mainly through the changes in their bodies and through interaction with their peers and they can mostly evaluate either by themselves or collectively what they do or do not wish to do sexually, although sexual discovery implies necessarily progressive traumas (in terms of pushing boundaries, not of violence). I find the idea of an age of consent absolutely disturbing, as if desire could be restrained by law, which is something that belongs to totalitarian regimes, although democracies seem to advocate it in order to protect kids. In most cases the law does not protect anyone, it actually creates occasions for molesters to act in the dark and abuse their power in order to obtain sexual favors from someone who is underage. Actually, being able to express love for a 13 or 14-year-old kid openly will protect him much more, for most of the psychological blackmail that takes place in these cases and takes advantage of embarrassing secrets would have no reason to exist. I think the body will tell the boy whether he wishes to explore sexual acts or not and if the act is not socially stigmatized and the adult respects the limits of the boy's wishes, then for me there is no issue at all. We seem to see sex as something problematic just because Eros is a very powerful drive but most people do not see that it is repression to damage people, not sex.
When I said pedophilia I was referring to lecherous attraction to a minor, which, since it is it is not technically unlawful, might or might not be understood as a bad thing. In the eyes of the state's system of laws it is a punishable act to engage oneself in sexual activity with underage individuals. Everyone agrees with that, but this leads me to ask: what should we do with that person that fantasizes with it? It is impossible for him to ever be with the ones he feels attracted to, he has to accept that. Then, should we sympathize with them for being that way? As Smokr said, there's no way they can stop themselves from having those thoughts, but they can voluntarily avoid their actions. Here's another thing: given that we are aware of their situation, isn't it understandable that they become pederasts? What could they do anyway? It's either to do nothing about it, consume the legal (I think it is) pornography (erotic fictions, drawings, animation), or rely on the illegal stuff; in order to get sexual relief. What do you think?
A reply from "John" who wrote to me after reading a couple of my stories. We exchanged emails for quite a while before we told each other more about ourselves. It was another while before he told me that he was a pedophile. We've continued to talk and exchange emails for years now. I'd trust him with my sons. Honestly. I'd probably have a talk with them beforehand, and afterward, and I would tell John so. But I would surely trust him with them. I guess, as I don't have any, and I'm sure actually having a son or daughter would likely change many of my thoughts and ideals. "John" is one of two men who have told me they are attracted to boys under 13 and I still communicate with. I have stopped emailing others who have been pushy or outright perverted in emails, who never admitted pedophilia but asked to trade pictures of boys, or spoke too intimately of boys and their anatomy, or such things that simply made me shiver or groan in disgust. That is a risk you take when you write the kind of stories I have written. But writing those stories is a way for guys like "John" to fantasize and release those desires without real-world complications and ramifications. It was after getting to know "John" and others that I began doing stories about even younger characters. As far as I'm concerned it's harmless fiction, just like the murders and mutilations in horror stories, or the other illegal activities in other popular stories ranging from theft to arson to the destruction of billions of lives on Alderan by the death star or the hundreds of fighter pilots in the Imperial fighters and X-wing fighters of the rebels. No one actually blew up Alderan, just as Aiden isn't a real 12 year-old boy picked up by a man on the street in my story Aiden At Twelve. But it entertains someone, and gives them another day of having only real boys to look at and fantasize about and stew in empty, desolate longing until they can't take it any longer and crack and do something they will regret with a depth and intensity the rest of us can only imagine. I've asked "John" if I can share this email of his from a while back again. I'm pretty sure I've posted it somewhere else when the same topic has come up before. It might have even been here, as I rarely visit other sights these last few years. On a side note, "James" is also a pedophile who I am still online friends with who finds men his own age a convenience while not being truly physically attracted to them in nearly the same degree as he is to boys. "John" finds men attractive but finds boys more attractive. "James" pretty much is only attracted to boys about eight to twelve, and is not nearly as outgoing about his attraction or nearly as willing to let me post his emails or thoughts on the topic. Timmy, if you find this disturbing or inappropriate, please edit or delete part or all of it. I will have no bad feelings or anger if you do. "John" will never know, doesn't know what site I am posting it to, and doesn't care. He's glad to share these thoughts with those who honestly want to hear them. "Quote:" The sexual attraction to boys is different from the one for men - at least for me and those I know. My attraction to men is most often based on personality and behavior, while the physical is far less important in what I fell for a contemporary or age peer.My attraction to boys is almost entirely physical traits-appearance. My libido is stirred by boys ranging from eight to twelve. A very few seven, a very few thirteen. I am a classic pedophile who finds boys sexually attractive. Boys younger than seven or so are not attractive to me. I see a baby. I also find men my own age attractive but in a different way. I have no desire for any kind of romantic-love relationship with a boy, merely sex and a protective relationsihip something akin to parently protection. I also know that I could never expect a boy to be satisfying emotionally as a mate or lover as a boy is not equiped mentally to provide such a thing, and we would have no basis between us to build such a relationship on. I do desire romance and love with a peer, though, and have had several satisfying relationships with men my own age. What I want form a boy is different from what I want from a man my own age. The attraction I find in boys is closely tied to a feeling of protection and something akin to parently concerns. Oddly. I want to wrap a boy up in my arms and love the precious little thing to the extreme. This creates a conflict with the knowlege that sex with a child is likely harmful and frightening to the child. Of course these emotional sensations and attraction extend into sexual realms and I want to give the child sexual gratification even to the point where I recieve little or none so long as the child is pleased. This is not entirely typical of the pedophile state of mind as I've come to understand it, at least as related to me by counselors. However i have been told I am out of the norm for a pedophile. Most pedophiles are concerned as much or more with thier own pleasure as with that of the child. A few are on the other end of the spectrum and are mostly concerned with their own pleasure at the expense of the child. These are the pedophiles that abduct, molest, and even kill to hide the abduction and molestation. To me boys are simply precious. I can't describe the attraction more deftly than that. The sight of a boy can create a deep and intense sexual desire within me. I have no control over that in any way. Just as any straight man cannot look at a beautiful woman and not be stirred with thoughts of sex and or conquest. A boy in a bathing suit is to me the same as a super model in one to a straight man. (I have removed a section here where he details the physical attraction of a boy's pre-pubertal body and parts and how it differs from the attraction to an adult's body and genitalia. It's a bit extreme for a public post) While I am so strongly attracted to boys I have never had physical contact with one outside of normal boundaries. I have never so much as foldled a boy after reaching sixteen years old myself. I have been quite able to deny the desire when the rare oportunity has presented its self. I know boys of the ages I find attractive do not need or want what I wish to do with them and I have no desire to force myself on them at all. I have a desire we know is not acceptable in our society and I know to keep it in check. My experience with boys bodies is almost entirely from internet pornography from before the laws and crackdowns removed it from the web. I had one experience with the neighbor boy that began when I was fourteen and he was eight that ended when I was sixteen and he was ten. We both enjoyed the experimentation and still have casual contact these many years later. I have told him I am a pedophile and that he was my first and last such encounter. He wasn't surprised and said he didn't regret what we got up to. He told me that he wanted to stop what we were doing because he started to wonder if I was gay and trying to make him gay. He didn't say that then just that he didn't want to do it any more. We stayed friendly for years. He is married with several kids, two of which are adorable boys, one within the range I find attractive. I don't fantasize about his boy as I feel it is entirely inapprpriate and stirs feelings of guilt and revulsion at myself. He introduced me as his old neighbor and friend to his wife and kids when we ran into each other at the state fair a few years back, and we have stayed in touch even more ever since. We both still live in the same area and I see him and his family on more than one occasion throgh each year. I desire boys. Just because I desire them doesn't mean I can ever have one. Most men would love to sleep with a super model but never will. Most people would love to have their own island, but never will. Everyone would love to have a mansion on a hill, but never will. I would love to have a boy, but I never will. We all have things we wish we could have but never will. Having a boy would also likely be destructive to the boy, and that is entirely unaceptable. I would never even scare a boy with talk of sex let alone force my hands onto him. It would be like smearing a work of art with mud. Imagine if you could own the car of your dreams, but if you drove it, you know you would likely wreck it beyond repair. Would you bother? Isn't it better to leave it alone and admire it, and have your fantasy?If you really want to prevent your under-teen boy from any kind of sexual experience, keep them from having any friends, or from sleeping over if you let them have friends. That is where the vast majority of boys have their first sexual experiences with peers. If you don't want them touched by an adult, keep them out of school, out of the boy scouts, and out of Catholic churches. Or best of all, talk to them, let them know you love and respect and care for them, and talk to them about their bodies and that they should not let anyone touch them in ways that make them feel uncomfortable. Just as they should not let anyone talk to them in ways that they find uncomfortable. Let them know they can tell you if anyone at all ever goes beyond their comfort zone, that it isn't their fault, and that you will be there to assure it never happens again.
I read the e-mail and both admired his honesty and bluntness but equally I felt rather worried this person has not sought help for his obvious infatuation with prepubescent children. To give his situation a more simple analogy I would say this... Some people smoke weed all their life and are satisfied with the "fix" they get from it. Some people however smoke weed and eventually end up on Heroin because the next level always seems that little bit more attractive. For John's predicament I would say from they way he talks, one moment of weakness could bring his and a child's house of cards crashing down and as with other aspects of life it is all to easy to bring something contained within your mind out into reality and in that respect I worry. We debate on these forums about subjects that offend society... society being a word I see more on this site than anywhere else but people on this site also try to justify Society's collective opinion as just people being brain washed by the masses. No, No, No! Society is much like a Jury. If you have 20 people in a room trying to decide if Mr's Smith's act of murdering his wife because she nagged him all day was right or wrong, and 18 people decided of their own free will that his act WAS wrong then you would have to argue that those 18 people are more likely to be right because 18 of those 20 had the same opinion and came to the same conclusion on Mr Smith's actions. It does not mean that 17 were brainwashed by 1 and those 17 just went along with him because he gave a powerful argument. My point? Well my point is this. If we are being honest, the only people that are going to think that pedophilia is acceptable is pedophiles. I think it is very naive to think (for example) that Mrs X hates pedophiles because Mr Y next door says that's what she should think. There are some things in this world that are just plain and simple wrong. And whether they are consigned to the mental thoughts of a person or acted out in reality does not make a difference. I believe pedophilia is wrong not because the western media tell me it is, or because my mother and father told me it was. I happen to think its wrong because pedophilia, if you look at the fundamentals of it is subjecting a creature to something that biologically, mentally and physically the creature should not have to experience before a due maturity. And just like non medical illnesses such as Hoarding and Gambling it should be treated as an illness and tackled. But for God sake PLEASE do not attempt to justify it as OK because it is not OK and 99.1% of the 6 billion people on the planet cant all be wrong on the subject. Not only that, when have you ever heard of a story when a person has finally had the courage to admit they were sexually abused as a child come out and say, "Do you know what? When i was being fiddled with at age X, I loved every minute of it." That collective disdain from the children who grew up to say they hated it should stand as all the evidence you need to say that everything about a man perving over a child is wrong. And again, just because it stays as a fantasy of the mind still makes it equally wrong because its like saying that Mr Smith THOUGHT about murdering his wife for 20 years before he did it. But its ok, we wont chastise him because he was only thinking about it, and its ok to THINK about murdering someone isn't it?
Wes, you didn't read his email close enough. He clearly mentions seeing counselors about it and learning from them. True, some people start with weed and move on to stronger drugs. This guy is considerably older than even me, so if he was going to move on past mere fantasizing, he would have done so decades ago. So would "James" as he's older than me too. I'm fifty. I would think that if I were attracted to kids I would have succumbed to temptation by now. I'm not that strong a person and can barely resist white chocolate or cheescake. In fact, I rarely can resist them. As for your jury = society example, you've clearly never been on a jury or known people who have been. LOL It is quite like that sometimes. One person can literally influence nearly all the others no matter the true right or wrong of the case. Even a cursory study of legal cases will prove how effective one person can be in that deliberation room, right or wrong, facts or no. That extends into all realms of human interaction. Ever seen a dozen kids standing around yelling during a fight? They're not yelling, "Stop it!" they're yelling, "Kick his ass!" because so is everyone else. We're followers by nature, with just a few leader types with the ability to influence others. No one here is arguing pedophilia is acceptable or not. Nor are we discussing whether the acts are right or wrong. We're discussing the question whether a person who has that attraction it is 'right' or 'wrong' in the way a person being gay is 'right' or 'wrong'. Is someone evil because they are attracted to youths the same as someone is evil because they are attracted to the same sex? 99.1% of six billion people say being gay is a wrong. Are they right? Are gays and lesbians evil or mentally deficient? We're attracted to the same sex. Religions spit on us and condemn us, even today. They beat us to death - even today. They throw us off of tall towers -- even today. They throw 15 year old boys of off towers to their gruesome, public deaths for being gay! But those same religious fanatics went home to sleep with their dancing boys. Go figure. Honestly, we're all in the situation where one moment of weakness can bring our lives crashing down. Especially us gays. Make a pass at the wrong guy, and you can end up in the hospital, or dead. How many times have we read about that happening? Or not even so much as making a pass at a the wrong guy, but just for being gay. As far as I know it IS okay to think about murdering someone. Well, maybe not okay, but it's not something to be punished or treated like a pariah over. There is no Minority Report as of yet. You can think about doing anything you want to think about, and you can even write about it. They are called fantasizing and writing fiction. By your argument, Stephen King should be in a mental hospital and therapy for the rest of his life, along with Dean Kounts and John Grisham, because they thought up those stories of murder. I should be in jail because I wrote about myself being sixteen and having gay sex with other under eighteen year olds. I not only had the conscious thoughts to do so, I wrote about them. I'm far guiltier than "James" or "John" under your argument. They merely think it with no conscious volition to do so, the thoughts simply form before they can stop them. So do many many others. Many not only think about being an adult and having sex with youths, they write about it. Are they evil, wrong, and should be put in into the mental health system? What about the father of the daughter who was raped who thinks about getting his hands on the guy who raped her? Is he guilty as well for his repeated conscious thoughts, even though he could more easily control them than John or James can possibly control their subconscious thoughts? Can you change the fact that you are attracted to males? I can't. They can't change the fact they are attracted to kids. They shouldn't be. We shouldn't be attracted to males. That father shouldn't have thought about killing his daughter's rapist. Thought crimes! And if you want to find people talking about having had sexual encounters with an adult when they were minors -- and liking it -- even today as an adult looking back, try searching for them. You'll find plenty. Many. A shocking amount. The longer you search, the more you'll find. Even better, try asking your gay friends. I've learned that a huge proportion of us had sexual encounters with adults when we were young, and liked them. We're all allowed to think anything we want. That's the point here. It IS okay to think about killing your wife. I'm sure most married men have at some point, if not each and every one. There is a difference between thinking about doing something and actually doing it. That is the point. And these guys can't even control the sudden thoughts inside their heads. They see a boy in shorts and their subconscious is already forming scenarios before they can consciously think, "Stop it". They can only control their actions, and they have. Even John and James say their attractions aren't acceptable. They can't accept them as normal or usual. They don't even try. They know their attractions to kids isn't typical, and they live with a guilt for those attractions that us gay guys can only feel in the merest pale shades by comparison. Frankly, half of your post is right out of the anti-homosexual agenda of the past, just 'homosexual' replaced with 'pedophile'. I'm not condoning sex with kids here, I'm arguing that at least two men I've met who are attracted to kids are not evil because of their attraction which they can do nothing about. They've done nothing evil, or wrong, or illegal. Not even their fantasizing. After more than five decades of fantasizing about pedophilic matters, neither one has gone on to heroin. I can't stop thinking about sex with men. I was raised that such a thing is grossly wrong. My parents would be humiliated. I knew my parents very well. They were about as bigoted as people can be without screaming obscenities at gays and blacks from the front porch. They did that in the privacy of their own living room, in front of me. I lived with that my entire life, and dealt with it through my adolescence and puberty and my sexual awakening. I knew if I told them I was gay that I would find my home life altered in ways I could never predict or live with. Mom wouldn't speak to her nephew, my first cousin, from the day she learned he was gay. Art became a non-entity in our house after that. I was ten. If he was going to be at a family gathering, we would not go. We never attended another Smith family reunion. We stayed away from Christmas and Thanksgiving at any relative's houses when Art was going to be there. Mom didn't even talk to her sister or husband after that, either, saying they should never tolerate that kind of thing and they were wrong to put up with it. I never saw Art or his parents or sisters again, until I moved out on my own. When someone on television was even a little bit fey or fem, my parents were verbally abusive to the point my face burned. Benny Hill was as far as my folks would tolerate any such thing, and only because the nearly naked ladies were clearly not homosexual in any way. Homosexuals were sick, depraved, inhuman creatures that Satan created. Period. That is how I was raised. I refuse to perpetuate that onto others who cannot control their attractions or sexuality. I can commiserate with them. I salute them for refraining from touching kids, and commend them for their honesty and openness, and support them in any way I can. So long as they don't cross that line. I don't care there are kids who enjoyed what happened to them. There are more who didn't, and who suffered and still suffer because of it. That some liked it is almost entirely irrelevant. Let kids mess about with their friends if they're going to do so. I am gay, but I will not force myself onto someone who isn't. They are pedophiles, but John and James have not and apparently will never force themselves onto a child. Therefore I call them friends and refuse to sit still and remain quiet while they are persecuted or considered evil merely for their uncontrollable sexuality. "All evil needs to flourish is for good men to remain silent." They have committed no thought crimes! P.S. I really need to work on a story. Between this and a post at OGame I put up over three thousand words tonight that could have been in a story instead.
"WestcliffWriter wrote on Thu, 14 January 2016 19:42" I read the e-mail and both admired his honesty and bluntness but equally I felt rather worried this person has not sought help for his obvious infatuation with prepubescent children. ... ... Not only that, when have you ever heard of a story when a person has finally had the courage to admit they were sexually abused as a child come out and say, "Do you know what? When i was being fiddled with at age X, I loved every minute of it." That collective disdain from the children who grew up to say they hated it should stand as all the evidence you need to say that everything about a man perving over a child is wrong. And again, just because it stays as a fantasy of the mind still makes it equally wrong because its like saying that Mr Smith THOUGHT about murdering his wife for 20 years before he did it. But its ok, we wont chastise him because he was only thinking about it, and its ok to THINK about murdering someone isn't it? -- One wonders where he would find a competent source for help with his orientation toward prepubescent children; the history of attempts to cure people of homosexuality suggest that considerable caution would be in order. Revealing such an orientation to an untrustworthy counselor might well prove to be a life-changing mistake. Considering that in this country children are being charged with distribution of child pornography for sending nude selfies to their peers, with the threat of being placed on a sex offender registry for life if convicted, I can well understand why such a person might be reluctant to seek help. Since anyone who has paid the slightest attention will know that any sexual contact they might have had while under the age of consent will be assumed to have been abuse, why would anyone who does not feel abused "admit" to having had such experiences? There could be a significant fraction of the population that has had such contacts and been nothing but pleased about them and we would have no way to know about it. Again look at the experiences of gay folks. At one time the psychiatric profession was largely convinced that homosexuality was universally associated with mental disorders. It took considerable time before they understood that the selection effect of knowing that someone was homosexual only when they had difficulties associated with their sexuality had given them a distorted understanding of homosexuality. I rather doubt that there are many adults who act on paedophile longings without making the children involved feel abused, but I understand that I have no way to know that with certainty. And I would argue that your final statement is a false equivalence, since it assumes that Mr. Smith ultimately murders his wife. It may be unfortunate if Mr. Jones lusts after eight-year-old boys, since he is not permitted to act on his desires, but it is wrong to chastise him for his orientation unless there is a practical way for him to change it. But then I would say yes, it is okay to think about murdering someone, as long as you are able to restrict your interest in murder to your thoughts. Your thoughts do me no harm, as long as they remain in the realm of thought; there is no reason for me to be concerned about what is going on in your head.
"Quote:" WestcliffWriter wrote on Fri, 15 January 2016 00:42 We debate on these forums about subjects that offend society... society being a word I see more on this site than anywhere else but people on this site also try to justify Society's collective opinion as just people being brain washed by the masses. -- Society is us, too. We are not above it nor outside it. We form part of it as individuals. Society has no opinion. Instead it is made up of people with many subjective opinions, yours, mine, his, hers. Many of these are in disagreement with each other to a larger or smaller degree. Some are diametrically opposed to each other. What happens in a democracy is that we have determined that we will elect people we deem to be suitable for the job to take those myriad opinions, and to distill from those the rules under which we wish live. We consent to this because we have chosen to. That does not mean that any individual is necessarily in total agreement, it means that we choose to abide by the way we have chosen to be governed. So it is nothing to do with anyone being brainwashed. Nor do we discuss things here that offend society per se. We discuss, instead, the things that people shy away from discussing. I wonder, then. Is it paedophlia that is wrong, or is it pederasty? I believe that window shopping is not in any way harmful, but that touching the merchandise is entirely inappropriate. I include improper lingering in showers and similar acts in 'touching the merchandise'. I should also point out that this is a metaphor.
"Hugs wrote on Thu, 14 January 2016 04:05" When I said pedophilia I was referring to lecherous attraction to a minor, which, since it is it is not technically unlawful, might or might not be understood as a bad thing. In the eyes of the state's system of laws it is a punishable act to engage oneself in sexual activity with underage individuals. Everyone agrees with that, but this leads me to ask: what should we do with that person that fantasizes with it? It is impossible for him to ever be with the ones he feels attracted to, he has to accept that. Then, should we sympathize with them for being that way? As Smokr said, there's no way they can stop themselves from having those thoughts, but they can voluntarily avoid their actions. I think the term "lecherous" is unhelpful. It is an attraction that, if acted on, would be unlawful, and would also cause potential harm to the child, but 'lechery' has religious connotations and is imperfect. "Hugs wrote on Thu, 14 January 2016 04:05" Here's another thing: given that we are aware of their situation, isn't it understandable that they become pederasts? What could they do anyway? It's either to do nothing about it, consume the legal (I think it is) pornography (erotic fictions, drawings, animation), or rely on the illegal stuff; in order to get sexual relief. -- I do not understand the linkage between "our being aware" and "become pederasts" and, in my view, there is none. Those who admit to themselves that they are attracted to this age group do not, in the main, act on their attractions. Pederasty is something they avoid. If they did not avoid it there could be no youth sport, no scouts, guides, nothing that depends on people who enjoy being surrounded by youth, because some, perhaps many, possibly all, are attracted to youth in some manner. Very few tamper with a child. Those who do make headlines. We have yet another such happening in the UK at the moment. Porn is an interesting issue. Many years ago there were Danish magazines, legal ones, such as Piccolo. Owning a lawful copy suddenly became a crime. Retrospective laws were enacted. Their pictures, somewhat tawdry if I recall correctly, suddenly became a crime to own. I never quite dared buy one back in the 1970s. in the 2010s I am glad I did not. Were the children harmed when they modelled for them? I have no idea. Some probably were, others not. Denmark had very different thinking over the human body back then. Were they right or wrong?
In ways I feel sorry for them. They are attracted to something they can't have. How entirely frustrating that be. My own lecherous attraction to young guys leaves me with no options either, but at least if someone of that age group comes along who is interested in sex with a fifty year old, it won't be illegal. These guys don't even have that possibility, small as it is. And even if they meet an under eighteen who is interested in sex with them, it is still illegal and rather questionable. Especially a child of the age they're for some reason attracted to. They're stuck. It must border on torture. Not only that, but they have to deal with the knowledge that their desires are considered so obscene and disgusting. It must be so demoralizing and depressing. I don't think I could withstand it. I could never act on such desires, so I'm sure I would take the easy way out and put myself out of my own misery. I can't help but admire their tenacity and strength. Odd to say that about a pedophile, but we're trained by society to think of pedophiles and sick perverts that molest kids on a daily basis, leaving the poor boys and girls in a morass of loathing and self-hatred. But it is the pedophile who never acts on their desires that is left in that morass by denying their desires and sparing the child. It's the pederast that we should revile and be asking the question, "Is he/she evil?" That question has an easier answer in my estimation. And a set of questions from "John"... Every straight guy thinks about sex with women. Some straight men rape women. Should all straight men be assumed to be about to rape a woman? Every pedophile thinks about sex with kids. Some pedophiles rape kids. Should all pedophiles be assumed to be about to rape a kid? If a pedophile is wrong for thinking about sex with kids, then aren't all gay men wrong for thinking about sex with men? Then aren't all lesbians wrong for thinking about sex with women? Is a straight man/woman thinking about sex with women/men the only right thing to think? What about the guy who likes fantasize about tying up a woman and doing what he wants to her? Is he now guilty of rape even though it has never happened?
Interesting questions. While I think thoughts are important, actions, in this case, are much more important than words. Personally, as I get older, younger persons have little attraction to me. I'm over 50, and have no desire for sexual activity with anyone male under the apparent age of 25, and prefer 30 and up. As for females, I can't be attracted to children or any female with slim hips-- that repels me and makes me think "child" even when the female is 35 or 40!
Here are the results
Another poll, of sorts. Respondents are self-confessed homosexuals attracted to minors willing to answer the question posed by a researcher in 2011. 1,180 answers. Age preference/primary attraction 13-15 = 52% 9-12 = 34% 16-18 = 11% 8 and younger = 2% Age preference/secondary attraction 9-12 = 42% 13-15 = 37% 16-18 = 19% 8 and younger = 1% Apparently more than half of 'pedophiles' are actually ephebophiles. I find it interesting that secondary attraction was mostly to younger instead of older, though 16-18 did almost double, and the numbers were closer.
hello, i am liam. i have always been attracted to boys, i am 41 yo now and i love boys so much. i have two nephews that are 10 an 12, but i love them so much as boys i wold never do anything sexually with them, but obviously i do think about it. it is hard being a boylover, always thinking about boys, but knowing you can never experience it with a boy. i think that homosexuality is the same as peadophilia, only difference is that peadophilia refers to young boys. now, homosexuality refers to male to male, but peadophilia refers to man to boy. there are always people of any sexual preference that will act criminal or have criminal thoughts, but those are people no matter what sexual desires they might have, are evil people. peadophilia is not an evil thing, it just means you are sexually excited towards boys. the same can be said about heterosexuality, the sexual attraction to the opposite sex, there is nothing evil about it.
Quote: abillionto1 wrote on Fri, 24 June 2016 20:10hello, i am liam. i have always been attracted to boys, i am 41 yo now and i love boys so much. i have two nephews that are 10 an 12, but i love them so much as boys i wold never do anything sexually with them, but obviously i do think about it. it is hard being a boylover, always thinking about boys, but knowing you can never experience it with a boy. i think that homosexuality is the same as peadophilia, only difference is that peadophilia refers to young boys. now, homosexuality refers to male to male, but peadophilia refers to man to boy. there are always people of any sexual preference that will act criminal or have criminal thoughts, but those are people no matter what sexual desires they might have, are evil people. peadophilia is not an evil thing, it just means you are sexually excited towards boys. the same can be said about heterosexuality, the sexual attraction to the opposite sex, there is nothing evil about it. -- This will have been a difficult post to make. I hear it as a plea form the heart for understanding, the more so since you look, enjoy looking, but do not touch, despite wishing that society felt it was ok to touch. More people than you can imagine are attracted to children of both sexes. It is the mark of a civilised person that he, or she, does not touch. Youth movements would not exist without those who love, truly love, children. It is those who interfere with the child that are a concern to the world, not those who adore them.