Paedophila

[michel]

you sound very knowledgable on this subject NRJ, good post!

 

[Prima]

It's plainly wrong for the simple reason that children are sexually immature; for them sex is torture, no fun at all.

That's utterly ridiculous and unfounded. Research suggests that children masturbate in the womb. Many people remember masturbating as young as they have memories - three, four, or five years of age.

The following quote was printed in the book The Clitoral Truth by Rebecca Chalker; it originally appeared in a letter in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 175, Sept 1996 page 753.

"We recently observed a female fetus at 32 weeks' gestation touching the vulva with fingers of [her] right hand. The caressing movement was centered primarily on the region of the clitoris. Movements stopped after 30 to 40 seconds, and started again after a few moments. Further, these light touches were repeated and were associated with short, rigid movements of the pelvis and legs. After another break, in addition to this behavior, the fetus contracted the muscles of the trunk and limbs, and the climax, clonicotonic movements [rapid muscle contractions] of the body, followed. Finally she relaxed and rested. We [several doctors and the mother] observed this behavior for about 20 minutes."

This raises the possibility that infant girls, as well as boys, may have some sexual awareness at birth. They may already know what sexual pleasure is and how to obtain it. Is it possible that fetal thumb sucking and masturbation are equally necessary and beneficial to the developing fetus? When an infant girl touches her vulva, is she just then becoming aware of it, or is she demonstrating what she learned or knew prior to birth? What are the psychological consequences of pushing her hand away? Would we do the same if she were sucking on her thumb? This one obscure record of fetal sexuality challenges our perceptions of human sexuality, if it does not in fact destroy them.

 

[Druidus]

That is very interesting Prima. It shows that not all sexual contact (though initiated and completely controlled by themselves) in children need result in "life-long scars", emotional damage, or other such negative things. It does not, however, show that intercourse with children would not be emotionally damaging to the child, beyond the physical damage that would almost definately occur to a pre-pubescent female child.

 

[Prima]

It does not, however, show that intercourse with children would not be emotionally damaging to the child, beyond the physical damage that would almost definately occur to a pre-pubescent female child.

Well, the quote I was responding to said sex, not intercourse - I guess it depends on what your definition of sex is. This is mine:

sexually motivated phenomena or behavior

Which includes oral sex, anal sex, etc....

 

[Druidus]

Which includes oral sex, anal sex, etc....

Again, it has not shown that these would not cause emotional disturbance. Personally, I am unsure. I doubt that the mere act of sex can cause emotionaly disturbance. I think it is whether there is an aggressor, a coercer, or another form of abuser, that determines whether emotional disturbance is a possible result, at any age.

I do not doubt that all sexual behaviour in minors/children does not cause emotional pain. I merely think that most require some form of proof. What was shown was only proof for masturbation, not other forms of sex.

 

[michel]

Again, it has not shown that these would not cause emotional disturbance. Personally, I am unsure. I doubt that the mere act of sex can cause emotionaly disturbance. I think it is whether there is an aggressor, a coercer, or another form of abuser, that determines whether emotional disturbance is a possible result, at any age.

I do not doubt that all sexual behaviour in minors/children does not cause emotional pain. I merely think that most require some form of proof. What was shown was only proof for masturbation, not other forms of sex.

One of the side effects of incest (when a parent is involved) is the lack of trust between the child and the parent involved - the child may not even be aware of it at the time. When sex (incestuous) involves a role model, the damage is that the child (when grown up) feels incapable to trust a sexual partner. People traumatized like this find it extremely hard to form relationships that go anywhere past friendship.

 

[IndigoChild]

That is very interesting Prima. It shows that not all sexual contact (though initiated and completely controlled by themselves) in children need result in "life-long scars", emotional damage, or other such negative things. It does not, however, show that intercourse with children would not be emotionally damaging to the child, beyond the physical damage that would almost definately occur to a pre-pubescent female child.

I don't know about you guys, but I lost my virginity at age 10 and I feel perfectly well adjusted. I don't remember how young I was when I first masturbated, but it was younger than the average.

Kat

 

[IndigoChild]

One of the side effects of incest (when a parent is involved) is the lack of trust between the child and the parent involved - the child may not even be aware of it at the time. When sex (incestuous) involves a role model, the damage is that the child (when grown up) feels incapable to trust a sexual partner. People traumatized like this find it extremely hard to form relationships that go anywhere past friendship.

The trust of a child is very fragile, and can be broken in numerous ways. Given the society we live in, incest is one big one. Other cultures, this is not so. Some cultures encourage incest so that the children have some experience before marriage. Oddly enough, in those cultures, the incest does no noticeable harm.

Child abuse in general is extremely upsetting to me.

Kat

 

[IndigoChild]

What, exactly, is the moral issue with paedophilia? Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's right to molest children, or take pictures of them for purposes of selling, but what, in essence, makes it wrong?

Secondly, imagine a child takes secret pictures of themselves, and hides them. When the child grows up, and finds them, the child decides to try to sell them. Is there something intrinsically wrong with this? Yes, as a child the person may have been unable to make such a decision, but he/she did make the choice on her own as a child to take the pictures, and now, as an adult, is making the choice to sell them. I honestly can't find anything wrong with this, because if she sold them, she might help a paedophilic person keep away from real children.

Thirdly, I know that many fantasies of male children of age of puberty focus on older women. I know this, because four, and even five years ago, I had such fantasies. Because I wanted this, and it was like a dream, why would it be wrong for someone to grant it to me? For this issue, my answer is much more clouded. The moral implications are great. Was I, as a child, capable of making such a decision? However, I am not definitively swayed in either direction. I don't want this to be an argument over whether in practice it would be possible or not to know if a child granted consent/actively pursued sex with an older person, but if presented with the opportunity, can any child make the choice?

And ye harm none, do (and think) as ye will. Why punish people for the fantasies if they don't do anything to a child?

Kat

 

[IndigoChild]

I think it's wrong because it skews the child's perception of sex and relationships. Even young children who may want that, or think they want it...I mean...I dunno about you, but I look back on some of my childhood dreams and wishes and they were totally off-the-wall. If I had been granted them...bwah I'd be so messed up now x_X.

As opposed to not being messed up?

Show me an adult that is not messed up, and I shall show you a moon monkey.

Not to mention that I can't have a pet gryphon to begin with >:{.

If it can be dreamed, it can be done. Given a few years, we could probably make gryphons real. Splice some lion DNA with some eagle DNA in the right combonation, and VIOLA!

Kat

 

[IndigoChild]

Simply put ,no.It takes a lot, really a lot to offend me.You have managed to do it quite well.This does not simply cheese people off, this is offensive.I will be ignoring this thread now.Good day.

If I were you, I'd take a deep look at why this topic offends you. In Shadow Work (as mentioned in "Dark Side of the Light Chasers" by Debbie Ford) says that whatever someone is most violently hateful/passionately angry about is usually an indication of either a denied aspect of their being or a denied possibility about themselves. In truth, though, there is nothing either bad or good that you cannot be, given the right circumstances. The microcosm contains the macrocosm. If another human being can do it or be it, you either already are being that or could be being that.

Kat

 

[IndigoChild]

Majikthise, I am only 16, and underexperienced in the world. I made this thread to see what you think. Can you tell me why it would be wrong for the hypothetical person to sell pictures of herself?

I really don't understand that.

What I do believe, however, is that on the whole, paedophilia is wrong. What I have trouble with, is how to stop it, and to what extent. In considering the details, I tend to miss the whole.

Paedophilia specifically describes the thoughts or fantasies of one who is romantically and/or sexually aroused by children. Not the crime itself.

I think part of the problem here is that you thought I was challenging the wrongness of paedophilia. This is not the case. I am looking for what makes it wrong, in it's essence. Is it the inability to give consent, or something else?

Even the most open minded of people tend to not want to discuss this topic, because it's the one topic that they're still programmed by society on how to think about it, and they're afraid to discuss it openly, lest their ideas about it change. Which is ludicrous! People talk about murder all the time, and you don't see people going around thinking murder is right and DOING IT. The ones who do it are going to do it regardless of what others think, and the same is true of paedophilia.

Kat

 

[IndigoChild]

Hi,

It's plainly wrong for the simple reason that children are sexually immature; for them sex is torture, no fun at all.

:biglaugh:Oh my God! You have no idea how much I am laughing at this! I lost my virginity at 10 to my year-older best friend, and it was the most fun I'd ever had in my life! I loved it so much that I was constantly asking him for more, whenever we were alone!

Kat

 

[IndigoChild]

This is BS with a capital B. Photos will not satiate a child molester.

How do you know? Honestly, over 90% of molestations are done by family. Of these, most are never repeated once caught. The perpetrators do not identify as pedophiles, and arousal tests verify this. Thus, they are rapists, plain and simple. They get frustrated, horny, stressed, and their wives give them no way to get sex. Often they are not attractive nor rich, and so cannot even have an affair or get a hooker. So, with no other means of relief, they rape their children. Children are to pedophiles as hot women are to straight men, but children are to these incestual rapists as their right hand is to their penis... a convienient, glorified sex toy, nothing more.

And priests are in the same kind of situation, and are thus not truly pedophiles. Having no attraction to children, they cannot, by definition, be pedophiles. After all, does having sex with your right hand make you a "right-hand-o-phile"?

Kat

 

[IndigoChild]

Recently, I read that Alfred Kinsey's data on child's sexuality were so skewed that if he did his 'research' today it would be laughed aside! He was very biased because he himself was gay & paedophiliac!

Kinsey was bisexual, yes, but he was no pedophile. He was a firm believer that no one should be forced to do anything they didn't want to do.

You're right that his conclusions would be laughed away today, though, but that's only because the Religious Wrong is in control and attacks any scientific look on sexuality, especially child sexuality.

I had sex as a child, and loved it. I couldn't get enough. And now it's a fad in elementary and junior high schools. I know, because my sister started telling us about it when she was in the 4th grade. Well, telling ME at least, because I'm more open minded.

And the fact is, abstinence-only sex ed is making this even worse. Nothing has really changed since Kinsey's time, except that people are noticing more. What's worse about it, though, is that they are having unsafe sex. Educate kids on safe sex, because they're going to have sex whether you want them to or not. Furthermore, making it forbidden only makes them want to do it more.

His motivation for his 'revolutionary' conclusions about american sexuality was to justify his own behavior.

Insubstantiated opinion based on nothing but conjecture and predjudice.

This is important for his books were accepted for years by the american people as 'scientific.' Yet now, women's groups are working to show that Kinsey was a fraud!

peace,
sonda

Yeah right. I challenge you to name ONE group. And I'll bet money that it's some stupid Christian group.

Kat

 

[IndigoChild]

I agree that it's perfectly natural for young children to have these "fantasies". To take pictures and sell them,however, is enabling people and encouraging people to devalue the purity of our youth. The effects of this can be devestating to our future generations.

:biglaugh:"Purity of youth" has ALWAYS been a pipe-dream of adults. It's an oxymoron, like "military intelligence." It depends on an un-natural definition of purity as well. Humans are horny animals from birth. Deny it all you want, but then everything is just going to happen anyway, right under your nose.

Kat

 

[IndigoChild]

Littlefoot: the same thing that makes anything else immoral, you're hurting someone.

Fantasies alone do not a molestor or potential molester make. I know lots of people who are turned on by dead bodies or by feces, but most of these people do not act on their fantasies.

Littlefoot... the legality of such pictures would severly undermine efforts to prosecute the crimes that are the reason child pornography is illegal.. basically forcing a kid to strip naked for a camera and or perform sexual acts. its something so sick that it HAS to be stopped, the occasional hypothetical where there was no harm done to cause the even not withstanding.

Force is not the issue here, try to stay on topic.

Littlefoot Because you're not ready to make that decision. Kids want to do drugs, drive fast, eat an entire boxfull of ice cream, eat all of their holloween candy on one night ETC. they're not allowed to because their judgement is so bad and THEY DON"T PAY ATTENTION TO THE CONSEQUENCES.

Most people aren't ready for those things well into their adulthood. I have only met a few people in my life who have truly grown up. So you pick an arbitrary age at which someone is magically an adult? Ludicrous.

Kat

 

[Melody]

If I were you, I'd take a deep look at why this topic offends you. In Shadow Work (as mentioned in "Dark Side of the Light Chasers" by Debbie Ford) says that whatever someone is most violently hateful/passionately angry about is usually an indication of either a denied aspect of their being or a denied possibility about themselves.
Kat

Psychobabble. Heaven forbid that it's possible for someone to feel passionately about something without have underlying "issues".

Yes, let's take a "deep look" at why this topic offends some of us. Could it possibly be because there is something seriously wrong with someone who fantasizes about having sex with a child? These people need help....not reinforcement that what they're doing is "ok".

 

[IndigoChild]

Paedophilia is wrong because a child is incapable of making decisions on their own regarding sex or sexual activity...frankly they don't realy know the deal and so to exploit that is wrong.

In the first place, I knew full well what sex was by age 8, despite adults' attempts to thwart that knowledge. Secondly, even if a child DIDN'T know what sex was about, it would be because of adults thwarting this knowledge. Adults have this mistaken notion that sex is bad, and are creating continuous generations of ****ed-up kids becuase of it.

Besides... manipulation and deceit happen in adult relationships too. OH GODS! REALLY? LET'S BAN ALL SEX!!! LET'S STOP BREEDING! ALL NEW CHILDREN CREATED BY IN-VITRO FERTILIZATION!

Honestly though, what makes a truly well educated child less capable of making sex decisions than an adult who's a moron (and most adults today fit this category)? I've heard of people breeding simply because it was expected of them, and then either ignoring or abusing their children. If society didn't expect them to breed, they would not have, because they don't like children.

Not to say that adults and children should necessarily have sex, I'm just saying that arbitrary ages of consent don't work. Did you know that most "pedophilic sex crimes" are actually 16 or 17 year olds having sex with 18 or 19 year olds? It's true, read "Harmful To Minors" by Judith Levine.

and no offense Druidus, even at 16 i didn't know the whole deal, i thought i knew everything and no one could tell me $#!+ but looking back i didn't know what the hell i was doing and i thank G-d that i'm not 6 feet under or in jail right now

Mistakes are not the domain of the young... plenty of adults do that too. Don't jusge all children because you happened to be an idiot when you were young. That's the problem with people today... they hate their childhood mistakes and thus hate children and childhood for it, not realizing that they're just completing the vicious circle.

Kat

 

[Melody]

Show me an adult that is not messed up, and I shall show you a moon monkey.

Cool. I'm waiting for the picture of a moon monkey since I know quite a number of adults who are not "messed up"....myself included.