danot Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 Well no I've never said that to anyone, and I think the signs are far more difficult to read between a paedophile and a child. I'm admitting now I wouldn't know what to look for beyond blatant sexual advances. People can act very affectionately around children and I would feel uncomfortable making assumptions about a person who happens to be particularly affectionate. I'm not sure, beyond some comedic caricature (e.g. ), what someone lusting after a child would look like. I saw the thread you started (I think it was yours) on a similar subject, so I'm aware we only really differ on this specific issue. Why would a paedophiles signs be more difficult to read??.. thats what you need to ask yourself. And I can't believe that you've never said that to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 You are again missing the point by some distance. The OP is asking you to try and consider the notion that not everything can be seen in black and white terms. In Rioja's example of the 15/16 year old topless model - what actually changes in the mind of the man? Is his lust to see her naked on the day before her 16th birthday wrong, deviant and paedophilic , but completely acceptable on and after the 16th birthday? It would be really useful if we could explore the reasons why we differ - can you comment on my example a little further up the page? Yes I can. It's because 100% of paedohplies have sexual desires towards children. They don't toy with the idea.. they actually all find children sexually desireable. Your statement '100% of paedophiles have sexual desires towards children. They don't toy with the idea.. they actually all find children sexually desireable.' doesn't actually address the example I gave (highlighted in bold). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 At risk of clouding the waters further I thought I'd point out that a bloke getting turned on by the idea of seeing a 15 year old breasts isn't technically a paedophile anyway since the term describes sexual attraction to prepubescent children. If the 15 year old has breasts she is post pubescent. We may not feel comfortable with what he is doing, but it isn't paedophilia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 What are you talking about??. 14 is'nt mentioned, i'm talking about the wording[ should a 15 year old girl appear topless on her 16th birthday..??. It's word play.. "should a 15 year old girl...). It's meant to offend. Who's talking about a 14 year old, or questioning the morality of a 14 year old?? Their just numbers for gods sake...answer the question. If it's legal at any certain age is it morally wrong a day befor they reach that age? Do you see morality and legislation as the same? Will you please answer the question? as you keep asking others to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epiphany Posted February 19, 2010 Author Share Posted February 19, 2010 Why would a paedophiles signs be more difficult to read??.. thats what you need to ask yourself. And I can't believe that you've never said that to anyone. That's why I was waiting for your definition before I answered your question. If it's so clear cut to you then please just tell me how you see it, because it isn't to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 Why would a paedophiles signs be more difficult to read??.. thats what you need to ask yourself. And I can't believe that you've never said that to anyone. Danot...At what point do you decide a paedophile is a paedophile? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 Clearly not the only kind. Some never touch children sexually, but just think about it. Some do touch children sexually, but without violence or coercion. Within those that do there will be different degrees of risk. The trouble with rigid thinking in an area like this is that it's not actually very helpful....should we deal with a bloke who confesses to a counsellor or doctor that he fantasizes about touching children in the same way as we treat a high risk serial abuser? I would suggest not and that it helps no-one to think about such issues in black and white term. I don't care whether someone only thinks about having sex with kids, I don't care if someones touched up 1 child or 100 children, I don't tolerate paedohpilia full stop. I don't want to understand the science and logic behind why some people just like to watch other paedophiles commiting the abuse while other go on to commit multiple rapes and murders. Thanks all the same, but i'll continue to tar them all with the same brush if that alright with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 I don't care whether someone only thinks about having sex with kids, I don't care if someones touched up 1 child or 100 children, I don't tolerate paedohpilia full stop. I don't want to understand the science and logic behind why some people just like to watch other paedophiles commiting the abuse while other go on to commit multiple rapes and murders. Thanks all the same, but i'll continue to tar them all with the same brush if that alright with you. Then why are you on this thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 At risk of clouding the waters further I thought I'd point out that a bloke getting turned on by the idea of seeing a 15 year old breasts isn't technically a paedophile anyway since the term describes sexual attraction to prepubescent children. If the 15 year old has breasts she is post pubescent. We may not feel comfortable with what he is doing, but it isn't paedophilia. EXACTLY!!, the younger they look the better, is that what you're saying?? Halibut, Turning 16 makes all the difference. A paedophile would not be interrested in a 19 year old that looks 15.. would you agree?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 I don't care whether someone only thinks about having sex with kids, I don't care if someones touched up 1 child or 100 children, I don't tolerate paedohpilia full stop. I don't want to understand the science and logic behind why some people just like to watch other paedophiles commiting the abuse while other go on to commit multiple rapes and murders. Thanks all the same, but i'll continue to tar them all with the same brush if that alright with you. What a shame that you're not prepared to even think about things from anything other than a rigid and inflexible point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.