GreenDestiny

Oh yes. I absolutely understand how upsetting it is. Nevertheless' date=' these people may be sadists but they are also pedophiles. The law calls them pedophiles. Most psychologists call them pedophiles.

[/quote']

 

That's not true. Most pedophiles are not sadists. There might be some pedophiles who are sadists, as there are heterosexuals or homosexuals who are sadists, but this is not something especially connected to pedophiles.

 

 

Green Destiny, I absolutely adore children, but I cannot say that I ever wanted to have sex with one. So want makes your love for children especially different from mine?

 

Exactly this, the sexual attraction. But read what is said: the comparison to your attraction to women. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be turned on by pictures of tortured women - most pedophiles wouldn't like to look at pictures of tortured children either. Their feelings are rather romantic. Yes, this might be different for simple erotic or sexual pictures which are of course abuse as well, but these kind of articles are always talking about violence and torture and increasingly extreme images on the net. This is often being connected with pedophilia and I just say that this is illegimately done so.

 

Oh but it does exactly have to do with pedophilia. These are people who are sexually attracted to children.

 

How do you know? I can tell you, most pedophiles are not interested in violent, sadistic pictures and I'm sure I know more pedophiles than you do.

 

 

Yes indeedy! Absolutely! But the people referred to in the link I posted want to share tips on how to find vulnerable children. This sort of banding together could have criminal implications.

[...]

Well anyone who reads the link I posted can see why it is viewed in a negative way.

 

Ok, I won't deny that these things exist. There are probably also some pedophiles involved. And regarding non-sadistic child pornography there are most definitely pedophiles involved (I'm not naive, I won't deny that). Still, the generalization that this applies to pedophiles in general is just very simplistic and not true. Regarding the online communities, there are many out there whose purpose is not the exchange of pornography. I have been to a couple of them, how many do you know?

Now this is what is terribly puzzling to me. If you feel that you are characterized as "vile" as a pedophile' date=' why don't you just get another label?

 

I mean, unless legitimizing acts of pedophilia is some sort of burning issue for you, why not simply call yourself something else? Or are you part of some sort of political movement?[/quote']

 

Actually this has been done. It has also been mentioned on this thread that the terms "boylover" and "girllover" exist. But this doesn't really change the situation, does it? It's just a new name... you won't really find much more acceptance because of it, it just sounds better.

Since the question of pornography has arisen today' date=' I thought some of you might be interested in how the internet allows pedophiles to connect with each other so that they do not feel and alone and also pursue their interest in pornography:

 

http://home.tiscali.be/marc.reisinger/PRESSE/DocPresse/2001-03-19%20Newsweek.html#BODY

I only read the beginning of this, but that alone is enough. The author is talking about pictures of children being tortured, of violence and everything becoming more brutal all the time. Well, I know a couple of other pedophiles from the web and I have read in a couple of online forums, so I think I'm not completely unqualified to say that this is nothing the average pedophile would be interested in. You know, pedophiles are attracted to children, feel love for children - so they are the ones who'd feel most repulsive about such pictures. Just think of it - are most heterosexuals interested in pictures of raped, abused, tortured women?

Probably these things are really available on the internet, I won't deny that, but this doesn't have much to do with pedophilia. I'd guess that the people who want to look at this kind of stuff are rather sadists or people looking for a new "kick" in their lives.

As for the other point you mentioned, how the internet allows pedophiles to connect with each other so that they do not feel alone, isn't this something positive? Isolation is a problem for many pedophiles, so the internet can help people gain more self-confidence and find perspectives how to lead a somewhat happy life. I don't understand why this is viewed in such a negative way. Maybe the people out there think of such forums as places for trading kiddie-porn only, but this is really not the truth.

what this gets down to is' date='

why a person with a know weakness in that direction ,

would want to put themself in a position of viewing images,

when it would be akin to an Alcoholic sitting around in a Bar all day?

why tempt yourself?

 

It's turned out that this behaviour has been deemed injurious to the public good.

 

And sorry if that has restricted your freedom, but you know as well as I do that you are only permitted a freedom as long as it doesn’t take away too much of anyone else’s freedom.[/quote']

 

Looking at (legal) pictures doesn't take away anyone's freedom.

 

What expectations do you have regarding pedophiles? Should they not be allowed to have a sexuality? It's only normal to have sexual thoughts from time to time, you can't stop that. And of course one also looks at pictures or movies from time to time. As long as it doesn't become obsessive it's also normal I would say. If you see a picture of a sexy woman somewhere, do you turn away? Only if it becomes obsessive it would be unhealthy IMO, but that is true for anyone. A hetero guy who watches nothing but porn all the time might also become unable of having a normal relationship with a woman. But that's not true for the majority of men.

 

I really don't think looking at pictures of boys has any negative effects on me, on the contrary. After all, everyone needs some outlet for his sexuality, isn't that true? Furthermore it's completely impossible to stop having sexual thoughts at all. And why should I want that anyway? Would you?

Those posts above disturb me greatly. You have stated your desire to be understood and accepted as a "non hurting anyone" kind of pedophile. But what you consider "non hurting" is very different than mine and other normal people. If you were truly a pedophile who is under control' date=' you would continue a very near normal life. Nobody would know that you crave little kids. You would not be on a bulletin board posting your feelings. You would not in your last few posts tell everyone that you continue to buy and keep naked pictures of kids.

[/quote']

 

So according to you it is immoral if pedophiles talk about their feelings on a bulletin board? It is immoral to watch perfectly legal motion pictures which happen to feature scenes with nude boys? Regarding the latter, I suppose it's only immoral if a pedophile watches one of those movies, because of his 'impure' thoughts? Well, this doesn't sound very convincing to me.

The point is although you say you wouldn't physically have sex with a child' date=' [so haven't hurt them'], the fact that you have extensive knowledge of where to go to obtain pornagraphic pictures of kids, means that you have encouraged the abuse, albeit second hand, you didn't do it yourself so you are blameless? innocent? So were those kids before those people got hold of them.

Well, first I think this argument isn't completely valid, because in fact if someone just downloads some pictures, there doesn't always emerge any additional harm from that. Only in cases where the abuser receives money or some other kind of positive feedback for it, the child porn consumer would cause harm. But I don't want to argue for the legalization of child porn. The whole discussion of the issue should only be a bit calmer, more rational and more goal-oriented, but I still think that looking at pictures of children of whom you know that they have been abused and had to suffer for these pictures is something which I would consider immoral.

I am sure if I looked hard enough, I too could get those kinds of pictures, even the legitimate ones in the medical books or educational videos, the difference is I don't because I am not interested in children in that way.

That's good for you. But in which way is this relevant to the discussion?

Children are something to be treasured, not next seasons fancy, they are not toys to play with and toss aside when they grow out of what ever phase of growth you prefer.

I absolutely agree with you about this. Children should really be treasured, although that isn't always the case in today's society.

You have admitted that you do in fact view this pornographic material, however frequent or infrequent that may be.

Pardon me, but where did he say this? Not every picture of a child is pornographic. You are twisting his words...

Also comparing pedophiles in general to murderers is not only offending, it's ludicrous. That's what I meant in my first posting - why can't people stay rational when this topic comes up? It doesn't make any sense to put a whole group of people in a corner, applying dismissive labels to them and accusing them of the vilest of things which are only true for a fraction of them.

i dont know about germany' date=' but in the US you are unlikely to find pictures of naked children in any of those places, and there arent many nude beaches. your best bet would probably be the book store, but even in that your more likely to find a sketch or a diagram in a medical or science text than an actual picture.

 

 

and you will find absolutely no nudity on tv.[/quote']

 

Well, I think there are quite a number of nude beaches here, although I'm not very often at the beach. There might even be nude people on normal beaches. As for books, nudity can sometimes be found in art. There's also a good deal of European movies with nudity in it. Well, I guess there are some differences between countries, but at least foreign movies are also available in the US.

Do you own have borrowed or by other means ever looked at pictures of naked children?

Strange question, who hasn't at some point seen naked children, be it in a biology book or on TV. Nudity isn't really unnatural or something like that.

If you were referring to child pornography, I might not be remembering it correctly, but didn't Merle Noir already say that he does not look at this?

Well, anyway, there are also many legal pictures of boys out there (well, although not all naked) one can look at, so probably not every pedophile will download child porn, if that is what you're aiming at.

Hi all,

I've been following this thread for two days or so and since it seems to be an interesting discussion I decided to register as well.

There's a lot of talk about sex and this seems to be the biggest issue concerning pedophilia. Understandable, if one thinks about serious things like child abuse, but still I think this topic cannot be reduced to only sex. Probably there are a lot of pedophiles who have never had sex in their lives.

Apart from the sex discussion I think social acceptance is also an important issue. As has been said before in this thread no one chooses his or her sexual orientation. Nevertheless pedophiles are in general regarded as evil monsters, as scum, as sick, as the lowest of all life forms, etc... Almost everyone in today's society looks down on pedophiles. Wouldn't it be nice if there was at least a bit more acceptance?

Just imagine what it is like to be that way. You can't talk to your friends or family about it, because you have to fear being rejected by them. If it somehow comes out it usually has serious social consequences. Just imagine, you always have to keep part of yourself secret and when the topic comes up somewhere it usually does in a way which gives you the feeling that your life is somehow less valuable. But what is this actually good for? I think this doesn't make much sense and at least this stigma should be removed from pedophilia - not every pedophile is a child molester. After all, just keep in mind there are also teenagers out there who notice that they are somehow more attracted to younger kids. It's tough to realize that you're gay, but it's even tougher to realize that you might be a pedophile - and often there won't be anyone you could talk to about it.

So I think apart from the sex discussion social acceptance of pedophiles would be reasonable. And while I don't think that this will happen in the near future, I at least hope that some improvements could be possible in the long run.