sixtyandaquarter
Member
I swear to god and all that is unnaturally holy, I do not want to see the pedobear in this thread
If you don't know pedophilia is the primary or exclusive sexual attraction by adults to prepubescent children. At current it is believed to be a paraphilia and mental disorder of adults or older adolescents (according to the ICD-10 and DSM IV standard medical diagnosis manuals), which causes significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning relating to said prepubescent children.
Generally as viewed as a mental disorder, the criteria needed to meet to qualify yourself as a pedophile is that in a period of at least 6 months one has had reoccurring intense sexual urges towards, fantasies about, or actively involves in sexual activity with a child generally 13 or younger.
Obviously one would have needed to act on these urges, or at the very least shows a sign of high distress due to them. Age wise you must be at least 16 years of age, and be having the prelisted pattern for children at least 5 years younger than yourself.
Common terminology includes that pedophilia can include any adult above the age of consent having attractions towards any individual (or individuals) below said age of consent. However this is actually not the case.
Now, then.
Notice the stressing on the fact that pedophilia is treated as a mental disorder? That's the crux of my debate here.
There has been a large growing debate on pedophilia, often the intent of one particular side is to link pedophilia to a natural healthy sexuality. Often a comparison is drawn to homosexuality, in that homosexuality in the 70's (I believe?) was considered an atrocious mental disorder that could be cured by pills and therapy (though some still foolishly believe so). This is the treatment for pedophiles, in general, and is used to show that one day pedophilia will be more tolerated, in the way some areas view homosexuality as an alternate lifestyle, instead of being sick in the head.
Now, on to the debate itself.
Is pedophilia "natural"? Is it a "mental disorder"?
Is there a difference between the two groups of pedophiles, those who were not sexually molested, and those who were? As some researches believe that those who were assaulted, are mentally cracked, while those who weren't are exhibiting a natural urge and response, and are not mentally screwed.
Will pedophilia ever be condoned? Is it the forever taboo? What would it take for society to "accept" it as an alternate lifestyle, would you ever?
If it is a mental disorder, can it be treated? That's a big argument as well. I really wish I had found the studies/papers I've read... some suggest that treatment only works on those sexually assaulted as youngsters, a possible note they feel at showing that "true" pedophilia is not a disease.
Others feel it is incurable, akin to what they'd say all other sexual predators show as far as statistics go. Sex criminals are so very likely to repeat their crime again, even more so than random cold blooded killings, according to the statistics (at least here in NYC). Is that a factor? Is it "incurable", merely "treatable", or simply too "natural" to hinder effectively?
I'm really trying hard to set this up without drawing sides here, actually play the "moderator" to the debate on this one - har har, bad joke parade... Anyway, so what are your thoughts on the subject at hand?
If you don't know pedophilia is the primary or exclusive sexual attraction by adults to prepubescent children. At current it is believed to be a paraphilia and mental disorder of adults or older adolescents (according to the ICD-10 and DSM IV standard medical diagnosis manuals), which causes significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning relating to said prepubescent children.
Generally as viewed as a mental disorder, the criteria needed to meet to qualify yourself as a pedophile is that in a period of at least 6 months one has had reoccurring intense sexual urges towards, fantasies about, or actively involves in sexual activity with a child generally 13 or younger.
Obviously one would have needed to act on these urges, or at the very least shows a sign of high distress due to them. Age wise you must be at least 16 years of age, and be having the prelisted pattern for children at least 5 years younger than yourself.
Common terminology includes that pedophilia can include any adult above the age of consent having attractions towards any individual (or individuals) below said age of consent. However this is actually not the case.
Now, then.
Notice the stressing on the fact that pedophilia is treated as a mental disorder? That's the crux of my debate here.
There has been a large growing debate on pedophilia, often the intent of one particular side is to link pedophilia to a natural healthy sexuality. Often a comparison is drawn to homosexuality, in that homosexuality in the 70's (I believe?) was considered an atrocious mental disorder that could be cured by pills and therapy (though some still foolishly believe so). This is the treatment for pedophiles, in general, and is used to show that one day pedophilia will be more tolerated, in the way some areas view homosexuality as an alternate lifestyle, instead of being sick in the head.
Now, on to the debate itself.
Is pedophilia "natural"? Is it a "mental disorder"?
Is there a difference between the two groups of pedophiles, those who were not sexually molested, and those who were? As some researches believe that those who were assaulted, are mentally cracked, while those who weren't are exhibiting a natural urge and response, and are not mentally screwed.
Will pedophilia ever be condoned? Is it the forever taboo? What would it take for society to "accept" it as an alternate lifestyle, would you ever?
If it is a mental disorder, can it be treated? That's a big argument as well. I really wish I had found the studies/papers I've read... some suggest that treatment only works on those sexually assaulted as youngsters, a possible note they feel at showing that "true" pedophilia is not a disease.
Others feel it is incurable, akin to what they'd say all other sexual predators show as far as statistics go. Sex criminals are so very likely to repeat their crime again, even more so than random cold blooded killings, according to the statistics (at least here in NYC). Is that a factor? Is it "incurable", merely "treatable", or simply too "natural" to hinder effectively?
I'm really trying hard to set this up without drawing sides here, actually play the "moderator" to the debate on this one - har har, bad joke parade... Anyway, so what are your thoughts on the subject at hand?