• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would you call pedephelia a disorder?

Do you believe pedophilia is a disorder?

  • Yes

    Votes: 27 58.7%
  • No

    Votes: 3 6.5%
  • It can be in some cases

    Votes: 3 6.5%
  • No, it's criminal even if it is a disorder

    Votes: 13 28.3%

  • Total voters
    46
If acted upon is a legal issue and has no bearing on the question posed in the OP

Whether it causes harm is still the criteria that should determine whether a particular behavior, desire or tendency should be (and usually is) considered a disorder.
 
You don't think a young boy discovering that he is attracted to other young boys causes distress?

Only if it is dispproved of by his culture.
 
Neither is pedophilia if you don't act on it.

It is to the person suffering from the disorder, which is why there is now the push to get people to understand that it (the attraction itself) is not a choice and that the person who hasn't acted upon those urges is not a criminal.

All pedophiles that rape young children, especially 12 and under, may have various mental or personaility disorders, but all are criminals---and all should be put to death ASAP.

First off, the upper age is 13 for pedophilia, a minor point to be sure. Unless you are going by the legal definition and not the medical definition, then no, not all pedophiles rape children. That is the whole point of the current movement. To get help for those who have the disorder before they harm a child. Are you saying that someone who has kleptomania should be jailed for theft (of both hands cut off if you want to get old world) before they ever steal something?

Another thing to remember is that 2/3 rds of pedophile victims are girls---as men are responsible for virtually all acts of pedophilia. However, all men (or transexuals) who rape boys are by the very definition of the word, homosexuals.

Stats to back this up please. From a non-bias source, that is. Most pedophiles choose their victims by opportunity, holding, for the most part, no gender preference.

I would agree with this, but now I'm going to play Devil's Advocate and extend the question a bit?

Would creating/sharing/obtaining "kiddie porn" that is either animated or portrayed by adults made up to look like kids... in other words, no actual children were used at all... qualify as acting on it?

To further your line of questioning: Does Age Play qualify as being pedophillic in nature?

The irony to your question is that I see a lot of cartoon porn that deals with the children (Johnny Test, Bed 10, Bart Simpson, etc), but for the most part they are not classified as "kiddie porn". Not counting the ones that show these characters as grown up when they engage in the porn.

It's a disorder, but that doesn't mean they were born with it. Diabetes type 2 is a disorder caused by lifestyle.

I also believe they can't be cured.

Neither can many disorders such as depression. They can however be controlled and maintained.

Also, just because it's possible that they are not born with it doesn't mean that they are not born with it either. Just like you can develop diabetes from either "lifestyle" or genetics, so too could pedophilia develop by both vectors.

Simpleχity;1063880220 said:
An analogy. A fascination of fire is not a criminal offense. But acting upon that fascination (Arson) is indeed a criminal offense and rightfully so.

Close. However I can act upon that fascination of fire by becoming a pyrotechnic in Hollywood, creating fires and explosions legally. How can one act upon pedophilia legally?

No, sexual orientation has nothing to do with pedophilia. One's sexual orientation is in regards to the ADULT gender that one is attracted to. Children are not part of that equation. Research consistently shows that males who molest boys are overwhelmingly HETEROSEXUALS. You don't seem to understand that attraction to adults and attraction to children in this case is mutually exclusive.

So then, just to be clear, if an individual has no attractions sexually to any adult and is only sexually aroused by children then their orientation is asexual?

Of course it's a disorder if you want to do it.

It's a disorder AND a crime if you actually try to/do it.

Sounds like shrinks with too much time on their hands.

Not really. There are too many people who want to make it a crime, socially if not legally, just to have the thoughts and to ostracize the individual instead of allowing them to get help.

The options hint that pedophilia can either be a disorder or a crime. That is not the case. It is a disorder if they do not offend a child. Once they do then they are not above the law and will face penalties when caught.

It is indeed the case of the two being separate. Granted that most times, if the crime is actually committed, then the disorder is present. However, just like male on male rape can occur with the perpetrator having no sexual attraction to the gender of the victim, so too might an individual rape a child with no sexual attraction to them. Legally the perpetrator has committed pedophilia, but is not actually a pedophile since (s)he is not actually sexually attracted to children.

I don't think it's that simple. Many who are abused never repeat the cycle, nor do they have any inclination whatsoever. This suggest... as a possibility, not a certainty... that those who do are 'born that way'.

Not necessarily. We also talk about how those who are victims of physical/verbal abuse also perpetuate the cycle, yet not all of them continue the abuse either. As to whether one continues a cycle of whatever type of abuse or not, probably falls into the same category as many other issues; it can be genetic based, "environmental" based or both. It might well be that some are just more resilient than others.

Its not pedophilia unless its acted upon.

It doesn't fall under the legal definition of pedophilia unless acted upon. The attraction alone is enough to fall under the medical definition. The two do not automatically align.

There is a way to eliminate child molesters from society, or at least to cut back on the incidence of it dramatically. Think about it: An armed robber, even after he's payed his debt to society, is not allowed to have a gun. He can still get one illegally, of course, but he's risking going back to jail.

A pedophile, in contrast, can not get his weapon back once it's been removed, so he's no longer a threat to anyone.

Just remove their weapons after the first offense. Problem solved.

Wow! the illogic there is astounding. Granted I'm going off of pure memory here, but I recall some story about a guy who had a "bobbit" type encounter and couldn't get his reattached. Yet he still went on to rape women, albeit without his own member. Rape and sexual assault do not require a penis to occur. I could rape a woman with a beer bottle (another incident I am recalling) without ever taking my pants off or even opening the fly. Additionally what weapon would you remove from the female pedophile?

You don't think a young boy discovering that he is attracted to other young boys causes distress?

I've known young boys whose sudden attraction to girls have caused them distress. We have all kinds of things that cause us distress. The question is whether the basis of that distress is factual or created. Being distressed over actions that can harm another is a factual distress. Being distressed over actions that do not actually harm another is created.
 
No need to give me a vocabulary lesson -- I have access to a dictionary too. The question is what is the main principle you're operating on? Because you're changing principles midstream.

I am only stating the facts---and the facts are that most pedophiles are not homosexuals, but that homosexuals commit acts of pedophilia far outside their statistical population.
 
This is completely invalid disinformation. Firstly, anything by Family Research Council is automatically invalid, as they are well known for lying with any information they present. Secondly, all research demonstrates that heterosexual men are the vast majority of folks who molest boys. Apparently you are one who is uneducated on sexuality and doesn't understand that one's attraction to children has nothing to do with one's sexual orientation. The former is a disorder; the latter is not. Men who molest boys are overwhelmingly heterosexuals.

I see a massive issue with prejudice and intolerance.

How can anyone really believe the psychiatric industry? They said homosexuality was a mental illness a few decades ago, and now they don't.

The APA (a highly political orgainzation) that constantly changes its DSM-whatever it is now, series, tried to get away with saying that Pedophilia was a behavioral disorder! HA. But quickly changed their tune after complaints.

Leftists that run the psychiatric business in the West are members of an occult science---perhaps only one step above Bigfoot hunters.

And by the very definitions of words---all men who rape or have consentual sex with boys are homosexuals. If you don't like what words mean, then create new ones.
 
You seem to be assuming that male pedophiles who molest boys are attracted to them because they are male. However, is it not possible they are primarily attracted to them because they are children and most such men may either not be attracted to adults or are attracted to women and not grown men?

Why would we assume that just because an older male molests a younger male that they are homosexual?

What percentage of male pedophiles who molest boys identify as heterosexual and engage in sexual relationships with women?

What about men who molest both boys and girls? Would you include their numbers with men who molest just boys? Would those men be considered bisexual? What if they have no attraction to adults or are primarily attracted to women?

And what about a man who only sleeps with other men but also molests young girls? Is he to be considered heterosexual?

Before we can speculate on whether gay men are more likely to molest children, we need to determine whether men who molest boys are actually gay.

Definition of Homosexual:


1

: of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex


2

: of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex

The word is what the word is. A male having sexual relations---rape or otherwise---has commited a homosexual act. A male man desiring to have sex with a boy is still a homosexual.

I'll go by what the traditional meaning and understanding of what homosexaulity is----not a white-washed, feel-good, new age, Orwellian understanding of what you think it should be.
 
And by the very definitions of words---all men who rape or have consentual sex with boys are homosexuals. If you don't like what words mean, then create new ones.
Many men are sodomized by male security-service personnel around the world or as prisoners of war. The purpose here is humiliation, not homosexual gratification.
 
First off, the upper age is 13 for pedophilia, a minor point to be sure. Unless you are going by the legal definition and not the medical definition, then no, not all pedophiles rape children. That is the whole point of the current movement. To get help for those who have the disorder before they harm a child. Are you saying that someone who has kleptomania should be jailed for theft (of both hands cut off if you want to get old world) before they ever steal something?
.

There is no real medical cure for pedophilia. I'll go by a what a common man in a jury would believe a young child, per-pubrety, would be. Just to be safe, 12 and under.

Pedophiles continue to rape children at a rate up to 50 percent---about the fatality rate of Ebola viruses. Imprisonment and psychotherapy are failed therapies. The only sure way to treat pedophila "disorders-HA" is by capital punishment.
http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsl...h_Letter/2010/July/pessimism-about-pedophilia

Theives should do hard time on chain gangs. If you like cutting the hands off people, then move to Saudi Arabia.
 
It is indeed the case of the two being separate. Granted that most times, if the crime is actually committed, then the disorder is present. However, just like male on male rape can occur with the perpetrator having no sexual attraction to the gender of the victim, so too might an individual rape a child with no sexual attraction to them. Legally the perpetrator has committed pedophilia, but is not actually a pedophile since (s)he is not actually sexually attracted to children.

To me this is unnecessary complication and/or slicing hair compared to what I stated.
 
To me this is unnecessary complication and/or slicing hair compared to what I stated.
D - It is called "splitting hairs" in English ;)
 
Simpleχity;1063886952 said:
Many men are sodomized by male security-service personnel around the world or as prisoners of war. The purpose here is humiliation, not homosexual gratification.

They are still homosexuals---as they commit homosexual acts.

Please come up with a new word fit your political agenda.

Thank you.
 
I am only stating the facts---and the facts are that most pedophiles are not homosexuals, but that homosexuals commit acts of pedophilia far outside their statistical population.

Basis for this?
 
Definition of Homosexual:


1

: of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex


2

: of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex

The word is what the word is. A male having sexual relations---rape or otherwise---has commited a homosexual act. A male man desiring to have sex with a boy is still a homosexual.

I'll go by what the traditional meaning and understanding of what homosexaulity is----not a white-washed, feel-good, new age, Orwellian understanding of what you think it should be.

Ah, so you are defining homosexual purely in behavioural terms. The incidence of homosexual behavior is far higher than the incidence of exclusive homosexual attraction. I know men who identify as heterosexual and are married with children who would be classified as "homosexual" under your definition. It would be intellectually dishonest to use self reporting stats that use a different definition of homosexual to argue a higher prevalence of homosexual child molesters. There is no way to discern how many people are homosexual under your definition.

Oddly enough, opportunist offenders who molest both boys and girls would also meet you definition.
 
Last edited:
You don't think a young boy discovering that he is attracted to other young boys causes distress?

It can be compartmentalized. Any inherent distress is caused by a hostile environment and lack of sex ed for gay youth. This aspect of distress is easier to brush aside than you think, once he figures out 1) attraction is meant to be enjoyed, 2) the feelings are so frequent that nothing can be done to stop it, 3) where's the harm in it? All that considered, within a few days he can realize all that hostility is overblown.

The distress that doesn't fade quickly is the fear that others in that environment will find out. Then it becomes a battle lasting years, a totally unnecessary one. In more accepting places, there are kids coming out at 12-13 who don't seem to face an internal struggle remotely comparable to an adult pedophile.
 
Pedo is a disorder. Like alcoholism is a dieses. Total BS.

What words would YOU use to describe pedophilia? Not a disorder, but a(n)______

Alcoholism is not a disease, but a(n)_____________
 
Do you realize that in some cultures and or religions pedophilia is not disapproved of? Does that make it OK too?

I don't see cultural relativism in his point, in fact exactly the opposite, and if that's your best case for homosexuality being "not ok"...
 
All pedophiles that rape young children, especially 12 and under, may have various mental or personaility disorders, but all are criminals---and all should be put to death ASAP.

Another thing to remember is that 2/3 rds of pedophile victims are girls---as men are responsible for virtually all acts of pedophilia. However, all men (or transexuals) who rape boys are by the very definition of the word, homosexuals.

MALE HOMOSEXUALS COMMIT A DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF CHILD SEX ABUSE CASES
Homosexual apologists admit that some homosexuals sexually molest children, but they deny that homosexuals are more likely to commit such offenses. After all, they argue, the majority of child molestation cases are heterosexual in nature. While this is correct in terms of absolute numbers, this argument ignores the fact that homosexuals comprise only a very small percentage of the population.

The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls. To demonstrate this it is necessary to connect several statistics related to the problem of child sex abuse: 1) men are almost always the perpetrator; 2) up to one-third or more of child sex abuse cases are committed against boys; 3) less than three percent of the population are homosexuals. Thus, a tiny percentage of the population (homosexual men), commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation.

/url]




The Family Research Council is a far-right anti -gay hate group.
 
What words would YOU use to describe pedophilia? Not a disorder, but a(n)______

Alcoholism is not a disease, but a(n)_____________

Crime.
 
Why even bring up homosexuality in a thread about pedophiles?
 
Back
Top Bottom