Paedophiles - where do they come from?

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by gorillasgocrazy, Apr 24, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. takandjive Killer Queen Registered Senior Member

    Absolutely they should be partially determined by statistics. We don't have the funding or resources to test for something like that. Look, at 17, I was ready for whatever got thrown my way, but I had to obey the laws because there has to be a legal line drawn for the greater good of all.

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. scott3x Banned Banned

    I know that at times people say 'the law', but it's misleading, because there is certainly more than one law. Anyway, laws have been written and rewritten for a lot longer then decades; you should be thinking of millenia, not decades. They still need improvement, though.

    I agreed with that point in my last post. Again, however, it doesn't mean that they couldn't be improved upon.

    There are no excuses for what? And which particular argument of mine do you believe I feel compelled to rally behind?

    I'll let the comparison point slide, particularly since there isn't really any 'law' per se, but rather an abundance of them, and few if any that are planetwide. I'm interested in knowing what implications you are speaking of, however.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. scott3x Banned Banned

    I disagree; I think it could be handled in much the same way that driver's licenses are handled.

    I agree; I simply believe that the legal line should work the way driver's licenses do, instead of basing it on how many times the earth has gone around the sun since a person was born.

    Time is not my primary concern. When designing the blueprint for a better society, one must always realize that society itself has to come onboard and society moves at its own pace; and if it doesn't, the blueprint will never come into effect, regardless of whether it's good or not. As to teenagers generally not being the best decision makers, granted. They need guidance, from people who generally know better; that is, adults. Society generally recognizes this, but when it comes to sexuality, it gets queasy. What results is frequently not too pretty, both from a lack of sexual contact as well as from bad sexual contact.

    I disagree; I believe that the age of consent laws take away something very important from people as well as subsets of society; the right to determine for themselves or for their societal subset whether or not they are ready to engage in sexual activities of x, y or z nature.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. scott3x Banned Banned

    Apparently the video can only be seen if you live in Britian, which is not the case for me. However, I did read a review of it in the british Indepedent and found it to be interesting.
  8. Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Lets remember that in the U.S a child is legally defined as anyone under 14. A paedophile is someone who wants to engage in sex with what is legally termed a child (under 14). Sleeping with a 16 or 17 year old may be against the law in terms of statutory rape but it doesn't make the adult a paedophiliac.
  9. takandjive Killer Queen Registered Senior Member

    Scott, bottom line: The laws aren't the problem. The problem is puritanism and encouraging abstinence over safe sex. Peer sex is normal. Healthy sex amongst equals is a great thing. Anything else isn't cool.
  10. Tnerb Banned Banned

    Men are always going to be wanted in this world. You're not ever really going to ever want a world with only women right?
  11. takandjive Killer Queen Registered Senior Member

    Oh, I think you really can't have one without the other.
  12. scott3x Banned Banned

    That is one definition, to be sure. From wikipedia:
    A child (plural: children) is a human being between the stages of birth and puberty.

    However, that is not the legal definition of a child. And when it comes to this issue, the legal definition is rather important. Again, from wikipedia:
    The legal definition of "child" generally refers to a minor, otherwise known as a person younger than the age of majority.

    As wikipedia explains, there are other definitions, such a parent of any age speaking of their child regardless of the age of said child, a "child of nature" or a "child of the sixties" as well.

    That is more or less the medical diagnosis, true. Wikipedia defines the medical diagnosis as an adult who experiences a sexual preference for prepubescent children.

    However, there are other definitions, which I think are quite important to consider. Again from wikipedia:
    In law enforcement, the term "pedophile" is generally used to describe those accused or convicted of the sexual abuse of a minor (including both prepubescent children and adolescent minors younger than the local age of consent).[13] An example of this use can be seen in various forensic training manuals. Some researchers have described this usage as improper and suggested it can confound two separate types of offenders.[13]

    Finally, there is the "common usage":
    In common usage, the term refers to any adult who is sexually attracted to children or who sexually abuses a child.[14][12]

    And I think I've established the many definitions of "child". This is why I have frequently stated that we must decide which definition we are using before any fruitful debate can occur. I think it's relatively clear that in the discussion between me and takandjive we have settled on discussing adult/adolescent sexual interactions, which medically is referred to as ephebophilia, but which most people have never heard of. Legally speaking, however, it can still fall under the 'pedophilia/pedophile' terms; it all depends on whether you live in California or Tenesee, Spain or Nebraska, if you're 3 years older or 4. Details in these cases really do matter.

    Again, it really does depend where the adult happens to be when eir does so, how old the adult in question is and perhaps even where eir lives (crossing state lines laws may apply). In other words, when approaching such gray lines with an eye to not breaking any laws, it may entail a detailed research of the age of consent laws of where you are and (if it's a different place) where you live. There is even a site to help people with these issues:
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2009
  13. John99 Banned Banned

    Scott your whole aregument skewed. It isnt the term or whatever the word used, which in this case is child, but not always. What matters is the guidlines in the law. Look at it this way: is it robbery or is it theft? technically it can be called either but this does not change the law. Do you see?
  14. scott3x Banned Banned

    I contend that the problem is both.

    Peers of what ages and according to whom?

    Even in the case of adults, relationships where there is a power differential of some sort or another doesn't mean that the relationship can't be beneficial to the people involved. And whether or not it's in fashion, some people who have relatively large age differentials do hook up and even eventually tie the knot, despite society's efforts to maintain the status quo.

    Perhaps the most famous american example is the story of Mary Kay Letourneau and Vili Fualaau. In essence, while the potential for a loving relationship between an adult and a minor may be diminished in today's society, it isn't impossible. And while you may feel comfortable in debating the merits of the current laws in an academic fashion, I, atleast, feel that if the people involved are happy with their relationship, society should let them be.
  15. scott3x Banned Banned

    The age of consent laws are a mighty tangle, John. What's legal in California is not necessarily legal in Tenesee and what's legal in Tenesee is not necessarily legal in Texas. And I'm not even switching countries here.

    Terms such as child, pedophile and pedophilia have multiple definitions and even some researchers have described this usage as improper and suggested it can confound two separate types of offenders.

    Fortunately, all of these things can be changed. More people can begin to differentiate non violent sexual offenders from the violent ones, for instance, and even people who engage in illegal sexual activity with pubescents vs. pre pubescents, as some researchers suggest should be done.

    Ultimately, however, I believe the main issue should be whether or not the participants in a sexual activity found said activity to be beneficial for them or not, which is why I think that people should focus more on consent and informed consent than the ages and/or age differential of the participants.
  16. John99 Banned Banned

    That is every law. People dont all vote the same way.
  17. scott3x Banned Banned

    Some laws are federal, but I agree that not everyone votes the same way. I would contend, however, that the laws fluctuate from place to place regarding when one is allowed to engage in x, y or z sexual activity primarily because the deciding metric, age, is an arbitrary one.

    Reaching a certain age doesn't necessarily mean that you're informed enough to engage in a sexual relationship just as not reaching a certain age doesn't necessarilly mean that you're not informed enough to engage in a sexual relationship and this is especially true when we consider that the range of possible sexual activities is so broad.

    This is why I suggest that instead of basing sexual permission laws on age, they should do so based on knowledge, just as driver's licenses are. Will this system start out perfect from the get go? Ofcourse not. But I certainly think it's much better then the age metric. And it can always be improved.
  18. leopold Valued Senior Member

    typical scenario of scott looking to score:
    hey little girl come here, i have a test for you.
    gee mister, what kind of test is it?
    oh nothing much, just a test to see if you know how to fuck.

    you're despicable scott.
  19. scott3x Banned Banned

    Your ignorance is showing leopold. Ever heard of written tests?

    Here is a testing schema that was shown to me in a forum, allegedly by a minor who helped write it....

    Proposed Relational Maturity and Sexual Competency (RMSC) testing schema:

    In order to be declared mentally competent to engage in consensual sexual activities (rather than having had a certain number of birthdays) under the proposed system, the test-taker proves his/her mental competence by passing a test.

    The testing requirements include:
    1.) Factual knowledge about sex, sexuality, reproduction and STDs.
    1.a.) Subject must understand the mechanics of sexual intercourse. Sexual anatomy, some common intercourse activities (at least the big three oral, anal and vaginal), masturbation, and outercourse activities (mutual masturbation in its various forms) should all be understood at a mechanical level.
    1.b.) Subject must understand the mechanics of human reproduction. Ejaculation, sperm fertilizing egg cells, warning signs of pregnancy including missed periods, a basic understanding of the nine month gestation period, childbirth, and the intrinsic physical risks of pregnancy. (Including factors that can increase those risks, ie low body mass and lack of physical development.)
    1.c.) Subject must understand his or her options in terms of preventing pregnancy. Subject must be aware of the existence and useage of barrier methods like condoms, hormone options like birth control pills, sterilization procedures like vasectomies, spermacide options, and demonstrate an understanding of the relative failure rates of these products. While it is not neccissary to be able to prattle off statistical failure rates, an understanding of which are most and least effective must be demonstrated, as well as the understanding that they can be more effective when used together.
    1.d.) Subject must be aware of abortion, what it is, the legal status of the procedure locally, and, if legal, the risks inherent in this procedure.
    1.e.) Subject must know about STDs. Subject must be aware that exchanging bodily fluids, particularly sexual fluids runs the risk of transmitting diseases. Subject must be aware that some such diseases are uncurable. HIV in particular should be understood in terms of its transmission methods, and its effects.
    1.f.) Subject must know where to go for testing and medical advice regarding STDs.
    1.g.) Subject must be aware of methods besides abstinence for preventing STDs, in particular the efficacy of barrier methods and the risks of multiple partners and anonymous sex.
    2.) the capacity to use critical thought to judge situations (consequence acknowledgment, goal setting, etc)
    2.a.) Subject must understand that actions have consequences.
    2.b.) Subject must be able to use prior experience and provided factual information to select the course of action leading to the best outcome in a hypothetical situation.
    2.c.) Subject must be able to recognize when there is not enough information provided in a question to provide a meaningful answer.
    3.) Ability to identify the fact that people lie to and use each other, and be able to judge (to a certain extent) when that's occurring in certain examples.
    4.) Understanding of the concepts of rejection (both non-personal caused and personal caused rejection, as well as being able to reject people themselves).
    4.a.) Subject must understand that not everyone wants to have sex with them.
    4.b.) Subject must understand sexual orientation, and that some people just don't want sex with certain categories of people.
    4.c.) Subject must recognise that some people do not want to have sex with them personally.
    4.d.) Subject must be able to reject others.
    5.) Understanding sexual ethics (like how rape is wrong, using sex to hurt people is wrong, and that using the withholding of sex as a weapon is wrong too. All because these hurt people for no justifiable reason.)
    5.a.) Subject must be able to diferentiate between rape and consentual sex in examples.
    5.b.) Subject must understand that rape is illegal.
    5.c.) Subject must be able to recognise sexual abuse other than rape in examples.
    5.d.) Subject must understand that sexual abuse is illegal.
    5.e.) Subject must recognise the problems with using sex as a comodity.
    5.f.) Subject must be aware of how to report the crimes they were required to be able to identify.
    5.g.) Subject must understand that they have the right to request any potential sexual partners be tested for STDs before consenting to sex.

    The proposed testing format is as follows:
    Use a review board, and allow researchers to propose alternative testing methods, approved by the review board, and allow anyone applying to take the test to use whichever approved test they wish. (I should point out the need for an oral test, under the assumption that even iliterate adults or children could potentially have the neccessary skills and knowledge even if they lack the skills and knowledge of reading and writing.)

    At the testing facilities, social workers will be present to evaluate and ensure that test takers are here by their own free will. Abuse intervention programs and counciling services will be avalible at testing centers.

    On site sex education classes will be availible in order to help prepare test takers for aquiring the factual knowledge required for requirement two. This should help aleviate the imballances in educational backgrounds of test takers.

    Upon having passed the test, a picture ID is issued indicating you are compotent to have sex. Having sex with an unlicensed idividual is treated as statutory rape. Test status will be hidden from third parties (First is Child, second is Government) unless the first party decides to tell someone (Ostensibly to prove sexual legality).

    If there is reason to suspect that an individual is trying to "play the system" (by deliberately remaining untested dispite being actually compotent in order to maintain access to partners unable to offer meaningful consent), the court could order that the parties involved be tested, and dealt with accordingly in terms of the results. If one party is found be capable and the other not, it should serve as compelling evidence that this was a case that should be treated as statutory rape, and the now compotent party would have to prove in some way that they only gained this compotence in the intervening time between the act and the sexual encounter. If neither party proves compotent, there's nothing to be done, regardless of ages involved. If both parties prove compotent, they should both be held criminally responsible, but not to the same level as if they were the only one involved who was compotent. Likely a fine of some sort would be the best choice for such an infraction.

    A grandfather clause is included in this proposal, such that anyone who is over the local age of consent at the time this proposal goes into effect will not need to be tested so long as they wish to be sexually active only with other individuals who were also grandfathered out of the program. If they wish to be sexual with someone operating under the new system, they must submit for testing, and thereafter abide by the new system as though they had not been grandfathered out of it.

    The primary difference is that actual compotency as determined by the test, rather than assumed compotency based on age is the primary determiner.

    Thoughts? Additional testing requirements you feel are important?
  20. takandjive Killer Queen Registered Senior Member

    Because no 16 year old cock for anyone? I think America will be fine, even if neither of us get to wear teenage pussy like a hockey mask.

    Like the average of US and Canadian law, which is about 3 years either way.

    Oh, get real. We're not talking about sex games. We're talking about legal status. It's the same reason you can't pick your bride from the local sanitarium for the severely retarded. Because you don't have the same decision-making skills/legal rights.

    Glad you pointed that out, because I'd been living under a rock for the last two decades. I'm not diminishing their love. I'm saying when he was a minor, he was not in a position to make a choice to have sex with an adult. "True love waits," right?

    They're not legal adults with full rights because there's a general consensus they're not ready. Can't vote? Can't fuck anyone more than three years older.
  21. leopold Valued Senior Member

    you already know my thoughts on you and this subject.
    why are you asking me for? you are the one that has a hardon for tests and little girls.
  22. Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Scott: Again, it really does depend where the adult happens to be when eir does so, how old the adult in question is and perhaps even where eir lives (crossing state lines laws may apply). In other words, when approaching such gray lines with an eye to not breaking any laws, it may entail a detailed research of the age of consent laws of where you are and (if it's a different place) where you live. There is even a site to help people with these issues:

    Well ok, the definition of a child is 14 and under. In the site you provide the age of consent doesn't seem to to go below 14 save in a few examples like Japan, mexico and zimbabwe. Though different countries and cultures have a different age of consent but it seems clear that most seem to think that the appropriate age of consent BEGINS between 14-16 with the normal range being 16-18.

    Note that the age of consent is given at 12 but in the Philippines the actual law reads like this,

    Sex with any child up to the age of 12 is classified as forcible rape. Sex with someone over the age of 12 but less than 18 is permissible as long as the age difference between the two is less than 10 years. Thus a 20 year old can have sex with a 15 year old but a 26 year old can not have sex with a 15 year old.

    Now, clinical paedophilia is defined as follows:

    Clinically, pedophilia is defined, to give one definition (from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th edition, Text Revision, American Psychiatric Association): Diagnostic criteria for 302.2 Pedophilia

    A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).
    B. The person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.
    C. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion

    Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.

    The term states that a child is someone under the age of 13. And that a paedophile is someone who is interested primarily in a child under the age of 13. This means that a paedophile is someone who wants sex with anyone 12 and under. These are not relative definitions, it seems clear that no legal system thinks it normal to have sex with anyone under 12 and that adults who have sex with anyone under 12 are paedophiles.
  23. John99 Banned Banned

    scott is having fun. he cant be serious. he must have gotten kicked off the other forum already.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page