1001
1002

He makes sense (youtube.com)

malakistiri が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]stuck_with_mysql 60ポイント61ポイント  (18子コメント)

why did you feel the need for the last sentences. All 3 examples could still exist with segregated bathrooms. Since you talk about exposing others bias, you vilify pedophiles as if they choose their sexual preference whilst viewing transgender behaviour in a different light.

[–]drakoslayr 19ポイント20ポイント  (16子コメント)

A tiger is a tiger and can do tiger things like maul people. While a tiger is born a tiger, it is not bias to separate a tiger from those it can damage. It may not be a pedophiles fault for being attracted to children, but it can only be best for the child that the 2 are separate.

/u/pathslog 's point in this is "...as different people realize their potential to feel better in life" is that a transgender being a transgender doesn't involve anyone else. A pedophile doing things pedophiles like to do..... can hurt other people.

[–]The_Doculope 22ポイント23ポイント  (8子コメント)

Then we should have separate childrens bathrooms, not separate gender bathrooms.

It may not be a pedophiles fault for being attracted to children, but it can only be best for the child that the 2 are separate.

Most men are attracted to women. It's not their fault. Are you saying that the primary reason we have separated bathrooms now is because men and women are attracted each other and pose a threat to each other?

A pedophile doing things pedophiles like to do..... can hurt other people.

I like women, does that mean I like to rape women? You are conflating paedophiles and and child molesters, which, in a discussion about non-choice issues like transgenderism, is extremely hypocritical.

[–]drakoslayr 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

are pedophiles not at least slightly more likely to harm a child? Are less than 50% of child molesters attracted to children? I'm no proponent of thought crime, but safety is a game of percentages. The post is referring to people with the potential to do damage in a bathroom, ones that could be willing to actually do the damage, not the "average functioning pedophile" and that's what I was refering to just to be clear.

[–]hoonmaster 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

And a gay would be more likely to rape a man or at least sexually assault/harass than a hetero. I guess with the "game of percentages", gays shouldn't be in the military, an organization primarily consisting of men.

[–]Feet2Big 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think from a risk standpoint, there are types of people that are more likely to harm a child (or anyone for that matter), and these types of people are also much more numerous.

People tend to give sexual crimes against children a much brighter spotlight due to it's particularly abhorrent nature, and forget the vast majority of physical and mental abuse heaped upon children the world over.
It is a problem, but the mentality we are adopting regarding it is causing more harm than good.

[–]no-compassion 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

You're last statement is pure logical fallacy, and one of the most common - the loaded question. As well, it makes a false comparison.

The proper comparison to a pedophile isn't whether liking women indicates a desire to rape them, but whether the men in the same bathroom with women are sexually excited by imagining raping women, spend time on websites that portray the raping of women or engage in fantasies about raping women while satisfying themselves sexually.

Therefore, making the fallacious comparison that you made, while making you sound very accepting, is nonetheless completely inaccurate and misleading. If you believe that any woman would be comfortable associating with men whom they knew regularly fantasized about raping them, and further, that they must be accepting of such fantasies, then you are wrong.

As well, if your belief is that as a parent, I must be comfortable and accepting of having my child in the company of someone who is sexually aroused by fantasies of sexual acts with children, then you're delusional.

[–]The_Doculope 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

I wouldn't say my last question was loaded. Just because a paedophile is attracted to children does not mean that they like to hurt them. Many (I'd guess most) hate what they are, and would never dream of laying a finger on a child. I made the comparison to draw attention to the differences between a paedophile and a child molester.

If you believe that any woman would be comfortable associating with men whom they knew regularly fantasized about raping them, and further, that they must be accepting of such fantasies, then you are wrong.

As well, if your belief is that as a parent, I must be comfortable and accepting of having my child in the company of someone who is sexually aroused by fantasies of sexual acts with children, then you're delusional.

I agree with all of this. However, this discussion was in the context of gender-segregated bathroom, not age-segregated bathrooms. Child molestation is not only a heterosexual thing, nor is it only males that do it.

[–]no-compassion -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

Your question was the very definition of a loaded question. Go look up logical fallacies, because you continuing to commit them. Your second sentence is another logical fallacy, and your third and on and on. Your entire line of reasoning is based on unfounded assumptions and illogical conclusions: "I'd guess most". Your "guess" is meaningless and unfounded.

[–]The_Doculope 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your entire line of reasoning is based on unfounded assumptions and illogical conclusions

Please address these assumptions and conclusions directly then. I am interested in having an honest discussion.

From your previous comment:

The proper comparison to a pedophile isn't whether liking women indicates a desire to rape them

That was exactly my point. The parent poster was implying that "paedophile" = "child molester", and I was arguing against that, using a comparison to something that most people are not reactionary about.

[–]hoonmaster 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Don't throw around the "logical fallacy" card. It makes you sound stupid, nitpicky, petty and it makes you appear as if you have no valid points. Your response further down shows exactly what i mean.

And to be clear, there was no loaded question.

[–]stuck_with_mysql 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

who said a pedophile has to do things a pedophile likes to do, what even are the things a pedophile likes to do. I was only really responding to that last point of his in any case since he defended transgender as not being a "sickness" but wasn't so accepting of all orientations. I could argue society pandering to the whims of a few sets a bad image for children

[–]JwA624 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

You're right. There's a difference between people who are attracted to children and people who molest children. I've wanted to punch people in the face as hard as I could on several occasions in my life. I never once have gone through with it. Should I be jailed for assault like the others who, unlike me, couldn't control their compulsion?

No. Pedophilia is not a crime. Child molestation is a crime.

But one step further, it's also not a sickness. Unless you also want to say that being gay is a sickness.

[–]drakoslayr 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I may have overstepped as I don't agree with thought crime. But the parallel in the post was there are several kinds of people with the potential to damage another person in a bathroom(an obviously incomplete list), and probably meant the people who actually would do the damage.

[–]drakoslayr 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Safety is statistics, I'm not saying every paedophile can go through with harming a child, only the heightened potential to. Sorry for alluding to the actual action.

If in neither case, the pedophile or transgender person, choose these things and I don't think that they do at least in most cases, then even still, we can only "pander" to one over the other because only one doesn't infringe on the right of a child involved.

[–]EatMyBiscuits -5ポイント-4ポイント  (2子コメント)

biased

The word, in the context you used it, is biased.

[–]drakoslayr 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Perhaps, but only as biased as I am for not sticking my finger in every electrical outlet I've ever laid eyes on. Do all pedophiles molest children? No, but would you lock a pedophile in a room with children just to find the result, on purpose?

[–]heynicepenis -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

While we're here, clichéd.

[–]pkayl 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Pedophiles may not choose their sexual preferences but by definition they can't have consensual sex. Ergo, all sex a pedophile has with a child is rape and hurts someone. Transgendered people aren't hurting anyone when they have consensual sex in a body they simply feel more comfortable in.