What is a pedophile?

[Coral Rhedd]

And indeed' date=' out of myself and the one or two other BLs I've met in real life, there's not one who exhibits any stereotype or signs of being anything other than a perfectly ordinary heterosexual male.

[/quote']

 

Ezekiel, here is where I got confused about how you define yourself. This statement is why I thought you were saying you were heterosexual.

 

However, I think most heterosexual males would deny being attracted to young children.

[GreenDestiny]

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.

[ezekiel23]

.

[Coral Rhedd]

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.

 

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

 

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?

 

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?

 

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.

 

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

 

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?

 

I do think it is a positive thing as long as there is no intend to molest children.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

[Coral Rhedd]

ahh, yeah, i see. I was just refering to appearance there. As in, if you met me in real life, my guess is that there'd be no way you would be able to identify me as a paedophile in the same way that you can sometimes (and I'm sorry if I offend anyone here! you know it's true sometimes ) identify gay people.

 

Oh, I know I would not be able to indentify you as a pedophile. One of my reasons for starting this thread was so people could come to realize just how much pedophiles seem like everyone else.

 

I am sure you present yourself as a very nice person and I bet most people like you, but if I should have grandchildren, forgive me if I would not want you for a babysitter.

 

Care to ask me why?

[Callipygous]

ill do it!

 

whys that coral?

[ezekiel23]

.

[Coral Rhedd]

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.

 

What has been consistently ignored -- or carefully avoided -- in this thread, is any real understanding of how early sexual experience affects children. While one might have some understanding of your position, and even have some sympathy, the bottom line is that some pedophiles posting in this thread mostly seem to want to nudge the law ever so slightly to allow legal sexual contact with children.

 

Is this true or not?

 

Or do you think the laws that each country now chooses -- which define various forms of sexual contact with children as illegal -- are just fine?

 

A simple yes or no will do.

[Coral Rhedd]

I'll tell you. Ignoring physical interaction' date=' here's a little selection of questions. Have you ever felt physically upset and frustrated that you can't be with a particular child, even for a single day? Does being with one particular child make you happy unlike any other person in the world? Does seeing that child being happy bother you even more than your own personal welfare?

 

If you answer yes to all of those...I guess our love isn't so different after all [/quote']

 

Well mine came with parenthood.

 

But why ignore "physical interaction" if that is what is part of your feelings?

[Coral Rhedd]

Here is why I would never allow Ezekiel to babysit a grandchild of mine:

 

dak

My body tells me it is right' date=' my experiences tell me it is right [/quote']

 

Because I believe that ezekiel really thinks -- whatever his actions to date -- that there is nothing wrong with sexual activity with children.

 

I have nothing but the best intentions for children - combine that with the law as it stands and, even though I am somewhat pro sex if the rare occasion present itself, you've got someone who will never touch a child in the way you don't want me to.

 

Ezekiel is "pro sex" with children. Babysitting for my grandchild, he might decide that a rare occasion had presented itself.

 

I dunno...really I dunno...I live for other things now. I try to use what I am to the advantage of boys, but not use them to my own advantage.

 

Ezekiel cannot even honestly acknowledge the damage that adult sex with children causes.

 

There is one boy I am particularly close to who knows what I think of him, and ya know what? he is fine with it and somewhat close to me too. I think that's kewl, and at the moment, couldn't really ask for more.

 

Pay particular attention to the words "at the moment." Not only has he burden this boy with an explanation of his own feelings, but he doesn't preclude the arrival of the right moment.

 

Imagine for a moment the confusion this boy must have. He likes Ezekiel -- I have already agreed that Ezekiel is probably very likeable -- but now he has to think about what Ezekiel may feel for him. Tell Ezekiel, what do you mean when you say that this boy feels "somewhat close to me too."

 

How do you know what this boy feels?

[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?

[Coral Rhedd]

For those who are interested here is a brief explanation of the role that narcissism may play in pedophilia:

 

http://www.mhsource.com/expert/exp1050602a.html

[Bettina]

[Originally Posted by Bettina]

Quote:

In post 204 above, you admit your being tempted. That makes you different from me and all normal people.

Quote:

You're telling me you've never been tempted when the opportunity for sex with someone your attracted to came up... Well you certainly are different then me but I'd say if when an opportunity to have sex with someone your attracted to came up you where not tempted that maybe your the one with the problem not me.

 

With all due respect, I am surprised you would find this so confusing. I have never thought of nor have ever been tempted to have sex with a little boy. This makes you and I as different as night and day....In other words.....I'm a normal human being.

 

Don't get me wrong. I am not flaming you, I realize there is something wrong with your brain that makes you different from me, but you need help.

 

Bettina

[Bettina]

I'll tell you. Ignoring physical interaction' date=' here's a little selection of questions. Have you ever felt physically upset and frustrated that you can't be with a particular child, even for a single day? Does being with one particular child make you happy unlike any other person in the world? Does seeing that child being happy bother you even more than your own personal welfare?

 

If you answer yes to all of those...I guess our love isn't so different after all [/quote']

 

 

I believe you would love a child like a normal person would...but the scary part is that you also have a sex drive that could take it to a deeper place that a normal person would see as unthinkable.

 

Bettina

[Coral Rhedd]

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

[/quote']

 

I said that the link referred to pedophiles who were sadists.

 

Here is what I think:

 

Not all pedophiles are sadists.

Not all sadists are pedophiles.

But some pedophiles are sadists.

 

Like it or not, U.S. law defines use the word pedophile to characterize sexual offenders who have sexual activity with children. That means almost any kind of activity that could be considered sexual. Including but not limited to, suggesting sexual activity and view any type of pornography or nudity used for the purposes of sexual seduction. Even giving gifts for the purposes of sexual seduction can be used to obtain a conviction.

 

So you see, you can L O V E children and not physically harm children, but still be breaking the law and I am fully supportive of that law.

 

Exactly this, the sexual attraction. But read what is said: the comparison to your attraction to women.

 

I am a woman. I am sexually attracted to adult men.

 

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.

 

I am also a writer and there is absolutely no thought off limits to me in the pursuit of credible writing, but I am in no danger of molesting children because my thoughts do not dwell there.

 

Their feelings are rather romantic.

 

No one really knows what anyone elses feelings are absolutely. We can only speculate. Your idea of romantic images of children might me my idea of an offense because I do not believe children should be used in media for sexual purposes.

 

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.

 

Talk about violence and torture all you want. I am not so focused on the dramatic instances of crime as I am interested in the slow erosion of the will that is the sexual seduction of children known as "grooming." This also harms.

 

 

 

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.

 

You know the law cares not one whit about your thoughts. Only your actions. Don't break and you don't have a problem. You can think about sex with children, loving children, being romantic with children, even torturing children if that turns you on and the law won't care.

 

The law is a reflection of the standards of society and not the thought police of some science fiction novel.

 

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?

 

Why would I want to visit them? I think the more interesting question is why did you guys all show up at roughly the same time?

 

Are you all the cavalry to the rescue of pedophiles who have been sadly mischaracterized as sexual offenders. Well many pedophiles are sexual offenders. We don't have to think of you guys that way -- unless of course you have some confessions to make.

[GreenDestiny]

What has been consistently ignored -- or carefully avoided -- in this thread' date=' is any real understanding of how early sexual experience affects children. While one might have some understanding of your position, and even have some sympathy, the bottom line is that some pedophiles posting in this thread mostly seem to want to nudge the law ever so slightly to allow legal sexual contact with children.

[/quote']

 

It seems to me that you couldn't find any more arguments to justify why pedophiles should not get more acceptance in society, apart from the sex discussion, so that you now resort to the argument that pedophiles might want to change the laws. But what difference does that make? At least Germany is a democratic country and here it is ok to try to change the law. It's just, if your claims are completely unjustifiable and the majority doesn't think that way, you wouldn't have a chance anyway.

 

Is this true or not?

 

Or do you think the laws that each country now chooses -- which define various forms of sexual contact with children as illegal -- are just fine?

 

A simple yes or no will do.

 

Well, I think the law in Germany is quite ok. The laws of some other countries where the AoC is 18 are completely bogus. But many people here think that way, normal heterosexuals. Still, the laws in Germany could also need improvements in some aspects. To name an example, it would be legal for a 12yo to have sex (of whatever kind, not necessarily intercourse) with a 13yo, but one year later, when one turns 14 it would become illegal (Maybe it would even be illegal before, but of no importance because both are children [persons under 14], I'm not sure about that). Or imagine a 16yo boy having sex with a 13yo girl - that would also be illegal and this is not a completely abnormal situation. I think if you can have legally sex when you are 14, why should it be impossible that there are also 13yo's who are mature enough for it?

 

Regarding adults and children, well, I think sexual abuse should be illegal. This includes rape, abuse where the child is passive and just lets the adult do because of fear and also cases where the child has been coerced into it. Still I think that there are some rare cases where such sexual relationships can be positive for both sides and I think a poster even told about such a situation somewhere on this thread. Because of this I think that there should at least be a law which would allow excptions if it is really clear to the judge that the relationship was really consenting and not damaging to the child. All other sexual relationships should still remain illegal of course.

 

But as I said before, what does the opinion about Aoc laws have to do with general social acceptance of pedophiles? You could be more tolerant towards pedophiles, but still be against any changes of the law.

[Kylonicus]

This is really disgusting,

 

Why can't yall just to agree to disagree and to hate each other?

 

Bettina obviously won't change her mind.

 

I and the other anti-pedophiles won't change our minds.

 

The pedophiles aren't gonna change their minds.

 

And the pedophile supporters are probably going to stick by what they have said.

 

The ped supporters have essentially said so much stuff saying how pedophilia is right, they couldn't admit their wrong even if they were confronted with a large amount of evidence, because that would be an extremely large amount of embarrassment.

 

Everybody is in too deep to change positions now.

 

Therefore, since nobody's mind is going to be changed by the arguements present here, then there is no point in having this debate.

 

Speaking of debate, this should be moved to the debate section.

[GreenDestiny]

With all due respect' date=' I am surprised you would find this so confusing. I have never thought of nor have ever been tempted to have sex with a little boy. This makes you and I as different as night and day....In other words.....I'm a normal human being.

 

Don't get me wrong. I am not flaming you, I realize there is something wrong with your brain that makes you different from me, but you need help.

[/quote']

 

This is the same kind of argument that could be used against homosexuality or people who like to participate in S/M sexual play or whatever fetish. There are many sexual variants - but does this actually say something about the people? I think in today's society nobody should be judged based on his sexual orientation.

[Coral Rhedd]

It seems to me that you couldn't find any more arguments to justify why pedophiles should not get more acceptance in society' date=' apart from the sex discussion, so that you now resort to the argument that pedophiles might want to change the laws.

[/quote']

 

I am victim advocate. I see children who are harmed by men who "only wanted to love them." I know what the children say the men said to them to persuade them to sex and silence. Those men usually tell the children how much they L O V E them. I want to see the laws strengthened so that it is easier to convict sexual offenders.

 

But what difference does that make? At least Germany is a democratic country and here it is ok to try to change the law. It's just, if your claims are completely unjustifiable and the majority doesn't think that way, you wouldn't have a chance anyway.

 

The U.S. is also a democratic country and it is okay to try to change the law here.

 

Well, I think the law in Germany is quite ok. The laws of some other countries where the AoC is 18 are completely bogus.

 

Let's put it this way: I don't much object to 18 year olds having sex with 17 year olds.

 

But many people here think that way, normal heterosexuals. Still, the laws in Germany could also need improvements in some aspects. To name an example, it would be legal for a 12yo to have sex (of whatever kind, not necessarily intercourse) with a 13yo, but one year later, when one turns 14 it would become illegal (Maybe it would even be illegal before, but of no importance because both are children [persons under 14], I'm not sure about that). Or imagine a 16yo boy having sex with a 13yo girl - that would also be illegal and this is not a completely abnormal situation. I think if you can have legally sex when you are 14, why should it be impossible that there are also 13yo's who are mature enough for it?

 

You can parse this all you want and it is all a red herring. The issue is adults exploiting children to satisfy their own sexual needs and then trying to convince people that the child is the seducer. Gimme a break!

 

Regarding adults and children, well, I think sexual abuse should be illegal. This includes rape, abuse where the child is passive and just lets the adult do because of fear and also cases where the child has been coerced into it

.

 

Children lack the ability to give informed consent. Children can be harmed by these situations and often are. The adult/child power difference is so great that coercion is already built in.

 

Still I think that there are some rare cases where such sexual relationships can be positive for both sides and I think a poster even told about such a situation somewhere on this thread.

 

I think you are dreaming mostly. But even you use the word rare. Rare. Rare does not justify changing the law.

 

Because of this I think that there should at least be a law which would allow excptions if it is really clear to the judge that the relationship was really consenting and not damaging to the child. All other sexual relationships should still remain illegal of course.

 

No there shouldn't. The law is there to protect children because they are not able to protect themselves. Making exceptions would only make children more vulnerable and would give seducers of children more legal wiggle room.

 

But as I said before, what does the opinion about Aoc laws have to do with general social acceptance of pedophiles?

 

Plenty. Pedophiles should not accepted because to do so would make pedophile aggressions against children more acceptable. Pedophiles need to be studied, understood, cared about, and treated. I think this is about as good as you are likely to get given the large numbers of adult men and women, some of whom I have talked to, who see adult/child sex, or what they call abuse, as having caused them PTSD, identity problems, depression, and an abiding fear and mistrust of others.

 

Guess not everyone had a pleasant experience.

 

You could be more tolerant towards pedophiles, but still be against any changes of the law.

 

Tolerance leads to moving the line. I think we should -- at the very least -- hold the line.

 

I am sorry for your suffering, but I am sorrier still for what a child may suffer should you cross that line.

[ezekiel23]

.

[Coral Rhedd]

This is the same kind of argument that could be used against homosexuality or people who like to participate in S/M sexual play or whatever fetish. There are many sexual variants - but does this actually say something about the people? I think in today's society nobody should be judged based on his sexual orientation.

 

Here you are clearly saying that you want pedophilia to be viewed as an orientation. I have no problem with that if the word orientation is applied very broadly but orientation need not confer the right to sexual activity with children.

 

Consenting adults have right to make these sexual choices. Children need protection. You can have all the rights to think as you please. But children have a right to a childhood.

[Bettina]

This is the same kind of argument that could be used against homosexuality or people who like to participate in S/M sexual play or whatever fetish. There are many sexual variants - but does this actually say something about the people? I think in today's society nobody should be judged based on his sexual orientation.

 

There not.......What's being judged is the mindset of some pedophile ADULTS who have come here to tell us that ADULTS having sex with little kids is ok if the little kid doesn't mind for various reasons.....thats all.

 

An example of mindset is in another post of yours......the bold print bothers me the most.

 

Regarding adults and children, well, I think sexual abuse should be illegal. This includes rape, abuse where the child is passive and just lets the adult do because of fear and also cases where the child has been coerced into it. Still I think that there are some rare cases where such sexual relationships can be positive for both sides and I think a poster even told about such a situation somewhere on this thread. Because of this I think that there should at least be a law which would allow excptions if it is really clear to the judge that the relationship was really consenting and not damaging to the child. All other sexual relationships should still remain illegal of course.

 

 

Bettina

[Coral Rhedd]

thank you for picking holes in my wordings' date=' coral. Ya know, I've been here a lot but really I don't have time to spend hours making all my posts as utterly PC as I can.

[/quote']

 

Actually, your first post and most of subsequent posts were in this thread. I wouldn't call this old home week.

 

correct, in the right circumstances. and they happen to include having known a child for a very, very long time. And also that the child initiates. I would no more have sex on a whim with a child than you would with a woman. or are you particularly partial to one night stands?

 

You are confused again. A contemporary is not a child to you.

 

This is only because I believe it happens when a child is raped. Nobody has yet explained to me how consensual, enjoyable sex which causes no physical harm can be traumatising.

 

This means you give yourself permission to take every sexual action with a child that does not involve forcible rape. If you have done this in the past, then in my opinion, you would qualify well for a juvenile sexual offender program. If you do this in the future, you will be a sexual offender in fact.

 

In actual fact, reading what you wrote there rather enraged me. You do not know the circumstances. In actual fact, if you must know, I didn't tell him, he asked me. He guessed it, smart cookie. This was after I'd known him for over five years. It also happened online. The next day, I went into school fearing the worst. The first thing he did was come up to me beaming, put his arm around me and asked for a game of table football. We are the same age, we met in school aged 12. We are now both 17. He only learnt what I felt about him last year. He was a late developer. In fact he has still not really developed to this day, not looking a day over a young 14.

 

Poor guy. He will soon outgrow your interest in him. Where will you turn then?

 

I added the "at the moment" because I know that physically, there will not be long left in the lad for me. It is odd that, even though he looks a little bit over what I would normally be attracted to, I am still, very very much attracted to him. But pubity will surely soon hit him hard and fast. And especially as I now feel like I am starting to be truly and crazily in love with him, (although whether it is true love will be shown in whether it can stand the test of time), I feel sad and am clinging onto what could be the last few months of what has been almost an ideal situation for me. I am so lucky to have such a good freind as him, and having him there has psychologically helped me a great deal.

 

Why don't you get stop visiting with others who feed you addiction and recognise that you have a serious problem. Get some help.

 

What I mean by he is particularly close to me too is that, who is it he first turns to when he is bothered or upset? me. Who is it he wants to and enjoys being with? me. Who is it he doesn't mind even publically being physical and affectionate towards? me. Who is the only person he doesn't mind being openly affectionate towards himself? me. Who is it he sometimes tells really quite personal secrets and concerns to? me. Who is it he will touch and talk to if I have problems? me. Nobody else.

 

I am sad for you. You cannot even recognize friendship.

[Callipygous]

This is the same kind of argument that could be used against homosexuality or people who like to participate in S/M sexual play or whatever fetish. There are many sexual variants - but does this actually say something about the people? I think in today's society nobody should be judged based on his sexual orientation.

 

 

most people's sexual orientations dont involve psychological trauma to another person.

[ezekiel23]

.