Article

A friend sent me this the other day saying he was going to throw up. I read and and (thankfully) did not throw up >.>
The article is about Pedophilia and gives many examples of people from a forum for discussion about it. Most of the posts that he showed in the article were indeed "wrong" to put it one way but none of the people on there said anything about actually having sexual relations with children. They had dreams and fantasies and poetry about it but one post that caught my attention was a guy telling about his day in the park where he saw to small girls and talked to them but refrained from coming back to play with them though they invited him and he would for sure have liked to.
I myself agree that raping small helpless children is one of the worst things you could do said children and is totally wrong in every way - whether you were drunk at the time or not etc etc. Pedophilia on the other hand does not necessarily mean that there is any molestation going on. It is simply the idea of being attracted to children. Personally I don't think there is anything wrong with feeling an attraction, what gets you off, gets you off right? Sometimes one really cannot help that no matter how hard they try. So long as they don't DO anything about the attraction - sane people know that it is not cool or OK to molest kids (thier own or otherwise). Insane people that do wander around touching little children should be barred, but the ones that really try not to do anything wrong seem quite Ok to me.

What are you're opinions on the subject? (please read article before posting)

I would say that a person can't help their attraction towards a certain being. But I do have a question to ask if you are an adult and you have a attraction towards a 12 yr old girl is that considered a pedophile?

Yeah, that is considered a pedophile. Why wouldn't it be?

Because in the olden days I think around the 1800's. People would let their daughter marry a older man.

yeah. And there are still tribal scocieties where Children are maried, and in may cases expected to "consumate" said marrage. I tend to think that the whole idea of "pedophilia" is only a mental illness by proxy. Scociety deems it wrong, therefor any one who does "must be a monster! (OMG!)"

Actualy humans as a species look to youth and viggor as strong sexual cues, however, the main differece between a TRUE pedophile and some guy or woman that likes younger mates should be deliniated. I beleve that that delination is puberty. In my book, if you are old enogh to make more kids, you're old enough to stop being one. If no law existed, I think more men would seek girls MUCH younger than themselves.

Of course this raises an interesting point: suppose that there is a girl and she is 14, and there is a guy that is 22, how is a relation ship beween these two people wrong, and yet if the girl was 18, and the guy was 26 we wouldn't bat an eye?

I fully agree with Staff here. I would also like to add that the notion of "pedophiles" is a relatively new phenomenon.

I can speak from personal experience and tell you that my grandmother was 13 and my grandfather was 22 when they got married and started having kids around 1954.

That said, I think that wanting younger girls that are pre-period is a bit off, though.

I understand 14+ girls perhaps being attractive to older people.

But damn... that last article about doing crap with a TWO YEAR OLD?

I know I'll seem mean, but I find that disgusting. And no, not from "society", from the fact that someone is admiring a baby sexually.

You can only go so far with the excuse "society hates me"... if we let people do whatever they wanted all the time, the world would most likely go into an extreme state of chaos.

This just shows how much checks and balances are needed in society sometimes, as rare as I'd ever say that.

i cant believe theres even a thread about this (although i dont in any way argue with your right to post one).

the whole issue makes me slightly sick, and as such i dont believe i have the right to make judgements on it.

It is sick even though it's a 2 year old.

rephrase that, i missed the point

I think he means that 2 year olds are sick to begin with. Which is usualy true from my experiance.

You make a really good point here... as far as after pueberty goes I suppose people can make their own descisions though many young people are not ready to make such adult decisions in the world they have been raised in today as opposed to before when they were raised to be adults at a young age - definitly not like kids today. mainly what i am thinking about is the pre-pubescent kids... like, rape is not cool in general no matter how old you are and a two year old really can't give consent for sex because they don't actually know what it is...

If they do know what it is they cannot really give you consent anyway. Its a little kid and its considered as rape. But in this world today some people don't care if it is a underaged child.

I found something surprisingly realavant.

http://moynihaninstitute.org/milton.html

thoughts?

some of his opinions aren't true but I agree with some of it

The only thing the school should be concerned about is the fact that it was done in their locker room. If the girl consented, it's none of their business. <_<

In agreeance with the above statement it is simply not proper school conduct to be doing "private" things in public places not to mention what was she doing in the guy's change room in the first place? it's not like she was even allowed in there in the first place.. >.>

Just because you might not be "allowed" in the boys locker room, doesn't mean that you can't actualy go in there. I mean, as far as i can tell, the main difference in most schools is the paint job. other wise they are exactly the same, so it's not like its a secret what it's like in there.

And besides, girls have been going into guys locker rooms for a little "celebratory post game recreation" since like the 50's. It's a time honored tradition like getting plastered at after prom parties, or stringing a pair of the underwear up on the flagpole. As long as no one gets hurt what's the harm.

just as long as people have been doing it though schools have been against them doing it. The idea is that it is improper conduct for a public place of learning (or private place or learning since it is a private school if you are that picky) and the rules are set up for a specific purpose. If they do that off the school grounds the school is not liable to blame if anything goes wrong, like persay maybe someone gets pregnant or someone who did not to be part of it gets molested/raped. Not to mention the example the school wants to set - as a private school especially it does not want a reputation of letting its students have wild orgies in the changing rooms. Most schools no matter what kind of school or where wants a repectable reputation.
The harm is that people could get hurt very easily and it could cause a lot of problems for the school legally and reputation wise.

That is true the school doesn't want a reputation of young teens having sex within the schools. And if wild and strange orgies did happen it would tarnish it's rep.