Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Today we had a gay paki guy come into our school to talk to us about his experiences as the only openly gay coloured person in High School. My school devoted the whole day to spreading the anti-homophobia message 'n stuff. So I thought about different kinds of discrimination like Atheists in America and pedophiles. These are people who are more attracted to 12 year olds than anyone else by design and can't help it and they get discriminated against more than anyone else. It's okay for a gay guy to come out of the closet as long as he's not in Conservative Christian Country. But if a pedophile came out and admitted he likes little girls (it's even worse if he's also gay) he'd be shunned. You have to feel sorry for pedophiles, it wasn't really their choice to like underage people.

This is one of those taboo things. If I wasn't 16 it would be pretty awkward to voice my opinion.

Well, what one of my teachers who specializes in child abuse says is that pedophilia is a sexual preference, just like heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bi-sexuality. It's not a disease, it can't be cured. It can only be repressed.

_________________

Pedophiles ruin children. I don't know how anyone can be cool with that.




lol, archaic

Pedophiles emit some sort of child ruining aroma or frequency?

"-CENSOR'D-, there's a pedophile over there. If Johnny gets within 3 meters of him he might become dyslexic or disturbed!"



Does it matter? He said coloured himself, so I used the word.

So if a black guy calls himself the N-word, you're not going to get in trouble by calling him that?

"Paki" is not an acceptable word in most contexts, either. In fact, the other day on another message board, we had one guy who clicked on a thread about curse words, stumbled upon a list of curse words in it (nothing but a list), and got offended because "Paki" was on it, even though many other offensive terms, like the F- and N-words, were on there. But "Paki" was the only one he complained about. (The guy totally deserved to be offended considering he walked right into that situation, but that's aside the point.)

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

I believe he was refering to your spelling of the word "colored"

Having sex with a child is having sex out of wedlock, henceforth. As is the child lying to his mom about how many cookies he ate. Both are sinful in the eyes of God. Who is worse? Neither. Which is why I try not to judge people no matter what the circumstance.

But, not everyone is Christian. Most people weigh actions as good or bad by it's immediate and obvious effects on others. Pedophiles not only physically, but mentally damage children. Because they hurt that child, society shuns that person for their bad deeds. The same goes for homosexuals. Those who think homosexuals are terrible people beileve that if their child sees a homosexual, the child's mind is brainwashed to be homosexual. As is with black people. Black people are terrible sinners and if we look at them, we turn black too! Oh nos!

Okay I stopped being serious a while ago. sorry.

I think that's the root of the problem. Somewhere, somehow (media influence, most likely) someone linked sex/rape to pedophiles. If a kid gets raped by anyone they are definitely going to have problems if they're not a certain type of person. If they have sex when they're not ready they won't have bad problems, but they'll probably feel guilty and remorseful eventually.



I'm paraphrasing him, but I'm trying to retain his exact words as much as possible, so yeah. If I call myself a cracker breeder then I think it's okay for everyone else to. I have no problem with words, I use them everyday.



Oh, what a hozer! Take off, ya hozer! Take your "Zee"s and "Soda"s with you while you're at it!

Considering "coloured" is the modern spelling everywhere except the U.S. (even in Canada), no, very probably not.

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

The thing is, children aren't mature enough to understand sex and sexuality before teenage. They are unwilling to have sex, because it's a thing they don't fully understand yet, they're bodies aren't completely developed yet. Pedophiles usually have sex (or should i say, rape) without the acceptance or understanding of the situation by the child. It can be extremely traumatising for the child and a clearly punishable act.

Sex between, say, a 19-year old male and a 15-year old girl who are in a relationship with each other and both are willing to do it... That is a completely different subject.

Both partners are developed enough to understand what sex and sexuality is and both want to experience it. It's only the law that says it's not acceptable. Thus it's is a totally different, much more complex situation than child abuse.

Why do I get the feeling that some people think atheists are all mindless sociopaths without any moral understanding or sense of reality?

_________________
My music
My LJ

I have no idea whether or not it's an orientation like homosexuality, so I'm not gonna approach this from that angle. Really, all I can say it if it is an orientation I feel very, very sorry for them because their orientation is extremely problematic for society.

Still, I'm not really comfortable with pedophiles being used as a catch-all scapegoat. Every state-level politician wants to be able to say he's sponsored some flashy bill, and it seems the two easiest ones to get passed are increasing drunk driving penalties and increasing pedophilia penalties. No one's gonna want to argue with either of those because no one wants to seem like a drunk or pedo sympathizer. But in the case of pedos the penalites are starting to make a mockery out of the idea that you serve a sentence and you've paid your debt to society. Yes, it's a serious crime, but in most places now there's no such thing as paying your debt. Texas I think just took it to its logical conclusion and made it a death penalty crime or is trying to.. I think I heard that somewhere. Frankly I wouldn't blame people if they thought that was being more merciful. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people living under these sentences would rather die. There's gotta be a better way, but I don't know what it is.

Also agreed that it's not pedophilia for postpubescent teens. In that case it's not so much a violation of the nature of the child as an abuse of a lopsided balance of power in the relationship, though since we're not raising teens to be mature anymore in this society (people generally don't have an accurate view of the world and a sense of responsibility until after college now), for some of them it could have the same effect as a violation of nature.

_________________
ATTN: LOWER BOARD USERS HAVE MOVED TO ANOTHER FORUM. COME JOIN THE FUN!

excellent point, inverso. I couldn't agree any more. I'm just wary of politicians scapegoating people so much that they're just completely abjected by society (it may already be too late for that).

Only a matter of time before pedophilia gains the same level of social acceptance that homosexuality is gunning for.

God help us all. Where does it end?

_________________

I disagree. I do not think a 15 year old is responsible or mature enough to start having sex. Heck, there are some 20 year olds who aren't responsible or mature enough, but that's a different matter. The main reason being exactly what Tiger says in his last paragraph. And without a developed and balanced worldview, it would be very easy for an adult to take advantage of a teen. My thought is this: if an adult person wants to have sex with a teen, let them get married first. Let the adult take full responsibility for the teen's life and establish an equal partnership whereby the adult is not simply using the teen for sex.

As far as discrimination goes: I am not a pedophile, but I have been accused of it on occasion, without cause I might add. Why? Because I happen to be single and I happen to be a clergyman. This combination in some people's minds automatically makes me a pedophile. Get your own freaking minds out of the gutter, people!

But as far as pedophilia itself goes, within recent years, I have begun to see that people cannot always control who they are attracted to. That I can understand. However, I have to ask the question, can something be done to curb those desires? In our modern sex-obsessed culture, it seems that there are becoming fewer and fewer boundaries, and pretty soon, almost anything will be acceptable. What's more, people are basically encouraged to indulge every desire these days; no one is even bothering to ask the tough question, whether any particular sexual attitude or indulgence is healthy. While I do feel that it might not be right to condemn any person just because their desires are different, I do think those desires should not be indulged or encouraged. And let's face it: the only way for a pedophile to indulge his/her desires is by some act whereby a child is exploited, either directly or through some medium of pornography. So where do you draw the line? At some point, you do have to restrict that behavior and help the pedophile suppress their desires and develop healthy - or should I say more mainstream - attitudes of sexuality. Either that, or allow them to prey on children.

But here's what I feel no one wants to address: if pedophiles are to be expected to refrain from pursuing or engaging their desires, then where does that lead regarding other sexual issues? Would it mean that we might actually have to start considering that teens can be taught to refrain from premature sexual behavior? Or that philandering husbands actually ought to be expected by society to refrain from their adultery, or unmarried womanizers to quit acting like dogs? We might actually have to start reevaluating our social standards and start setting boundaries again!


Here I feel the issue is, the law is there to condemn offenders. Is there a single person on this forum who feels that there shouldn't be penalties for drunk driving, that it's not dangerous at all and should be allowed? I certainly hope no one is that stupid here. Drunk driving kills innocent people. And the fact is, there are some states that don't do enough to penalize drunk drivers; in Louisiana, for example, it is not uncommon for a person to be busted for DUI on a Friday night and be back behind the wheel by Monday morning. The law is there to protect innocent victims, and unfortunately, lack of good enforcement and, in many cases, lack of real negative consequences for the driver mean that many irresponsible people do not take the laws seriously, and as a result, place innocent people in danger. Let it be your friend or relative who is killed by a drunk driver, and then we can talk about whether the penalties are stiff enough.

And I feel the same applies with pedophia, that is, if under the law we are talking about behavior. Keep in mind, as demonstrated above, the only way that a pedophile can indulge their desire is by engaging in predatory behavior that in some way exploits children. Being attracted is one thing; acting out that attraction is entirely different and is mediated by the law. The laws are there to protect our children, and the fact that there are still predators who get away with their crimes seems adequate reason for us citizens to want better protection for our children from them. And these laws are specifically oriented toward - and defines pedophilia as - predatory and exploitive behavior.

And one more thing: while I have striven over the past few years to be more accepting of homosexuality, I have to confess, I feel the same way Lahi does on this. Years ago, when the debates about gay marriage started, there were people who warned that as our society becomes more accepting of sexual behavior and more promiscuous, it would eventually lead to this very topic right here. And I'll be darned, they were right.

_________________

So what you are saying is that we should treat pedophiles and homosexuals as below human?

God help us all, where does Lahi's madness end?

_________________

Except that homosexuality is between two clearly consenting individuals and a child can never be considered to legitimately consent? This is apples and oranges.


No one (here) is saying it should be allowed. It's way too easy to score political points by ratcheting up already stiff penalties until the punishment is counterproductive. Current penalties cause perps to be socially isolated for the rest of their lives, which may lead to a greater chance of recurrence. It's an elementary principle of social psychology: one of the greatest reformatory tools is better integration into society, not expulsion from it. I can totally understand the EEK PEDO reaction, but it's knee-jerk thinking, not long-term thinking.

_________________
ATTN: LOWER BOARD USERS HAVE MOVED TO ANOTHER FORUM. COME JOIN THE FUN!

That's true. My point was, that if a 19-year old and 15-year old were in love each other, there's a law forbidding it and that it's a much blurrier issue than pedophilia. A 15-year old doesn't necessarily have as mature understanding of sex than a 22-year old person.




So, what makes you think the teen is not simply getting married for sex? Marriage isn't going to do squat about the situation.
Instead, one should focus more on things like how to have safe sex what a partner is and is not willing to do, that there's more to a relationship than just sex etc.
You get married when you know you're willing to spend your life with him/her, not so you would get some non-existent license for sex or not feel guilty about having pre-marriage sex.



What the heck? Some conclusions people draw...



If both partners (or all partners, in some cases) are willing to do it and as long as there are no health or other risks invovled, I don't see any big problem.

I admit, I have some, hmmm, weird, yet healthy and legal, fetishes (or fantasies) myself. I've learned I'm not going to openly talk about them because I've seen what hypocrite morons some people can be about it.



Don't forget that not all forms of "non-mainstream" sexuality are "unhealthy" or wrong. Pedophilia is wrong because, like I said earlier, children aren't developed enough to have sex and thus it's usually about the adult taking advantage of the child, resulting in terrible traumas and mental problems.

What makes a sexual act a punishable act is harming others physically or mentally and forcing them against their own will. That's why raping is also wrong because you'll be harming and violating someone who doesn't want to have sex with you.

On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with something both partners are willing to do, whether it's something as unusual like foot fetishism or S&M (the kind that both are willing to do). Nothing should be forced upon someone and nothing should invovle actual huge health risks (suffocating, laceration wounds, anything serious).

For example, ranting at some couple that their "kinky latex evenings" are wrong just because it seems unusual? That's stupid. It's their business. Don't feed them your moral obligations.



Two men getting willingly married is still NOT the same issue as forcing a child to have sex with you. We don't live in a black & white world where everything works on an either or -basis, everything's either good or evil.

Sexual activity is not an "either or" -issue either. By being sexually active, that doesn't mean you'll end up doing either just regular 10-minute Saturday "fun times" with the good ol' wife or some immoral pre-marriage child-molesting back alley sexual murder-raping.

What comes to encouraging sexuality in today's world... Selling and advertising something with sex is what happens today, but you can't really just go and tell people what they can and cannot do (excluding the bad stuff like raping and child molesting) either. Some individuals and especially the media take advantage of sexuality on a regular basis and even use it to grab money. It is unfortunate and should happen less often. Nevertheless, you can't ban everything remotely related to sexuality in public.



Phew. That was a long rant. I hope I made my point.

Harming/forcing people = bad
Doing something (even if it seems weird to you) with someone who also likes doing it = not bad

_________________
My music
My LJ

My view on pedophilia is that being a pedophile and acting on it are two different things that should be treated differently. If I know somebody to be a pedophile, but I know for certain that I can trust him not to act on his desires, it won't bother me. He probably needs professional help, but I don't think having a fetish automatically makes you untrustworthy. This is one of those things that just really depends on the situation.

Another thing... don't take this the wrong way and read something in these words that isn't actually there, but it does also depend on the society. The ancient Greeks were notorious pederasts, but when the children grew up, they turned around and did the same thing. They didn't see it as a problem at all; it was normal life to them. I've heard of at least one tribe in Africa that makes the ancient Greeks look tame by comparison in that regard, but they too consider it a completely normal part of life. I'm not saying that makes it OK in our society; we're not ancient Greeks or an African tribe. But I still think that's something to think about.



Quoted for truth.

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

Ten points awarded to ramrod for inferring things into my post that were not there.



I concur wholeheartedly. I do not and never have equated homosexuality with pedophilia. I merely believe that when certain aspects of sexuality that are against the conservative view of things are introduced and become mainstream, other aspects are bound to gain the same sense of normalcy. And I'm not okay with that. But here we are.

So take a pill, rammy.

_________________

I concur wholeheartedly. I do believe that marriage is a serious obligation, and one that should never be entered into lightly or merely for the sake of some perceived advantage. You might note that in my post I said something about responsibility.


No kidding. But I've encountered at least two of those here. You might remember a year or two back, a fellow named Clan rHrN? The other shall remain nameless for now, and I certainly hope he's taken the opportunity to reconsider his opinion in this matter.


Here, I think you're reading more into my post than what I actually said. Remember, the topic here is about pedophilia, which in my own opinion, is an unhealthy attitude toward sex and toward children. However, for the sake of those who are arguing that it is a normal sexual orientation, my statement was intended to, how shall we say, "lighten" my intended meaning here.

Here's my intended meaning: anytime a person has difficulty viewing any other person as something other than a sex object, that is an unhealthy attitude. I do not consider a person looking at a young girl or a young guy and saying, "She's pretty," or "He's cute," the same thing as pedophilia. Pedophilia is when the person begins to view children as sex objects and indulges a type of lust toward them. This may be through fantasy, pornography, or even through predatory behavior. My contention is that, at some point, the attitude that the other person is a sex object must be challenged.

Frankly, I don't even think it's healthy if an adult man constantly thinks of adult women as sex objects, if that is his general attitude. And if he intends to function in society (i.e, not get fired or sued for sexual harassment, or getting maced in the face), he's going to have to learn to adjust that attitude. Love isn't the problem here. Lust is.


Maybe, but there are some of us who contend that that's part of the problem. There are no boundaries anymore; they're all being systematically torn down. The fact that we're now having a discussion in which some people are acting as advocates for pedophile rights is pretty compelling evidence to me. Five years ago, the slippery slope argument was dismissed; and now we're sliding down that slippery slope.

And you are right. The media do take advantage of those sexual impulses and feeds them for the sake of their own greed. I see this as a huge part of the problem. But if anyone even suggested that advertisers be held responsible, there'd be a huge First Amendment flame war.

The problem as I see it is that our modern society has been trained to feed its sexual impulses, rather than to examine them and keep them in line with what is good for society and healthy for the individual. Rather than honoring human sexuality, it cheapens it and turns it into something horrid and filthy. And here we are, discussing one of the final boundaries that our society considered uncrossable, and there are a few saying now that it too should be crossed. You are right in saying that our society has no clear distinction between right and wrong anymore. But I'm not so sure that that's at all a good thing.

_________________

"the conservative view of things"? "Normalcy"? first off, i dont think anyone's sexuality is against anyone's political beliefs (what happened to conservatives being interested in staying out of other people's business? anyone?)

and were all very sorry if the human race doesn't meet your expectations, lahi.

Conservative has more than one meaning, putitinyourear.

Use a dictionary sometime.

_________________

REMEMBER!

A pedophile is an adult who is sexually attracted primarily to prepubescent children, NOT an adult who is sexually attracted to and rapes prepubescent children.

I still contend the problem is lust. Children are not sex objects, and I have some serious reservations about anyone who says it's okay to view them as such.

_________________

The fact that you even have to say that, Didy, is a sad commentary on the moral state of our world.

It's frightening.

_________________

That's exactly how I felt when I saw the topic posted last night. I was so disgusted, it took me until this morning before I could even articulate a decent thought.

_________________

Totally agreed.

At this point, I think it'd be a bit redundant for me to say the stuff about kids not being sexually developed etc.

_________________
My music
My LJ

Thinking ill of someone for something they have no control over is disgusting. People who mental/physical disabilities mostly have no control over the circumstances that put them in such a situation and a lot were born that way. Someone with Coprolalia can't help that they randomly shout out profane words and to automatically label them as a bad person because of it makes you the bad person.

On the contrary: I contend that they Can and Should learn to control the way they think. We're not talking about a brain dysfunction, or a medical disorder - and if we were, I'd expect someone to come up with a way to treat it. We're talking about LUST. Nice try, but no go there, pal.

_________________

I think what Didy was trying to say is that if someone openly and out loud admits he prefers children as sex objects is no good. I do agree that someone in that state needs psychiatric help, otherwise he might do something really bad.

So yeah, pedophilia is a bad thing, but the people who suffer from it simply need help.

_________________
My music
My LJ

MikeMcG is merely the product of exactly what the Politically Correct Police have been working at for years.

There is no right and wrong. There is no good or evil. People are just people.

Moral relativism scares me to death. I can't think of a greater evil than pedophilia, and here we are having to debate whether it's even wrong or not.

_________________