11
12

Reactionary Facebook page supports paedophilia being a sexual orientation. (m.facebook.com)

AnschariusArachnist! が 投稿

全 52 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]Rokazulu 8ポイント9ポイント  (6子コメント)

Pedophilia ≠ Raping Children

Pedophilia is simply the sexual attraction to children. They are born with this urge just like gay people are. You can't treat it with therapy and you can't pray it away. Leave them to masturbate to 2D lolis and don't hate them for simply who they are.

If they act out, obviously that is a problem.

[–]EvilRethuglican#killallwhitemen -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

They are born with this urge just like gay people are.

Oh, for fuck's sake...

[–]UdenSyndIngenFrelse 11ポイント12ポイント  (26子コメント)

But isn't it? Please correct me if I am wrong; I am not trying to say paedophilia in action is okay or anything like that, but isn't it a sexual drive which they can't really control? That doesn't mean they should act on it, but I've always felt so sorry for paedophiles (WHO DOESN'T TOUCH CHILDREN!!) but can't get the thought out of their head, and can't really talk with anyone because of the judgement. Ofcourse as soon as they act on their thoughts, it's fucking off with their heads.

[–]dentybastard 10ポイント11ポイント  (1子コメント)

If they never act on it its not a problem, and they deserve our support. I heard recently that many child rapists aren't necessarily paedos in the first place. Rape isn't always a sexual thing, its about control or power or various other things. Many child rapists just want to fuck something and dominate something, and kids are probably easier than adults to satisfy that desire

[–]Batetrick_Patman 8ポイント9ポイント  (2子コメント)

If a pedophile is viewing child porn than they are participating in abuse.

[–]TorbjornOskarsson 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

I agree, but there's still a possibility that some of them don't do that

[–]UdenSyndIngenFrelse 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I absolutely agree with Patman, but yeah this was my point. I mean someone who doesn't act at all on their "drive" or "thoughts" or what you would call it

[–]EvilRethuglican#killallwhitemen 4ポイント5ポイント  (9子コメント)

Pedophilia is not a sexual orientation. DSM-V classifies it as paraphilia, a fetish.

[–]ravedeath1972 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

The DSM-V kinda fucking sucks though. I'm not super well versed in the radical critiques of it but it is definitely inadequate in a lot of ways

[–]EvilRethuglican#killallwhitemen 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, when it comes to texts that classify things, it's definitely important to remember that our society is also reflected within those pages. It wasn't that long ago that hysteria was considered a valid diagnosis. With that being said, my approach to pedophilia is one of pure harm-reduction. We can observe the damage that pedophiles do to victims, and so nit-picking taxonomy seems like a distraction that means diddly-squat to a victim.

[–]UdenSyndIngenFrelse 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Thank you! This was the kind of response I was looking for, now I am wiser :)

[–]cyanoside 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

yeah it's a type of paraphelia, like necrophilia

[–]notyetawizard -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

paraphilia: a condition characterized by abnormal sexual desires, typically involving extreme or dangerous activities.

Nothing about classifying pedophilia as a paraphilia disqualifies it from also being a sexual orientation—albeit an entirely unethical one.

The real issue of classification is whether the term "sexual orientation" is to be reserved only for orientation in the dimensions of gender, or whether it should be used in other dimensions as well. Personally, I am inclined to say that it should include aspects beyond gender, if only because the term does not explicitly refer to gender at all; rather, it's a cultural assumption that gender is predominately relevant to sexual attraction.

[–]aelia-lamiatranarchy forever 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Disagree. Kink isn't a sexual orientation. Pedophilia isn't either. Like someone could say their sexual orientation is "cougars"? It's just not cohesive enough. Discussion of orientation has to do with materially exploited classes of people, not whatever shit you get up to in the bedroom.

[–]notyetawizard 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Discussion of orientation has to do with materially exploited classes of people

This has been the case at times, but there is no reason why this should hold true for simple use of the term; although some orientations have been oppressed, oppression is not inherent to the base concept and will hopefully disappear over time—though sexual orientation will remain long after the oppression has ended.

As well, I see no reason why being attracted to cougars isn't "cohesive enough" to be called a sexual orientation; it's quite specific, and describes the orientation of the persons sexual compass extremely accurately.

[–]grapesandmilk 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

All of these just feel like ill-defined terms to me. How do we have any idea what "is" anything?

[–]notyetawizard 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Words, generally, must simply be agreed upon; however, where a term is composed of previously defined parts—such as "sexual orientation", where each used word has it's own meaning and even the parts of the words have their own meaning—the value of the whole should be at least approximately the sum of it's parts. Where the popular definition of the compound begins to differ greatly, I think it is best to redefine, while others would prefer to ignore the etymology—but that just feels so wrong, don't you think?

The alternative, of course, is to simply appoint me as the Holy Linguarch—see, linguistics is the only realm where I allow myself to eschew the anarchist code, and play the part of the tyrant! :D

[–]punkswcleankitchensnihilist 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

It's pretty offensive to gay people when you call every dangerous sexual deviancy a sexual orientation. It really shows how low you think of us and how valid you think it is to diddle kids.

[–]UdenSyndIngenFrelse 4ポイント5ポイント  (5子コメント)

I am very aware of that and please understand it is not my intention to offend, and if I've done so I'm truly sorry! And I am not saying paedophiles should have the same rights as gays or CIS etc.

It was merely a question, what is paedophilia and bestiality? Is it just a dominance fetish or?

[–]ShadowPuppetGov 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

Paedophilia and bestiality are considered rape.

[–]UdenSyndIngenFrelse 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

Absolutely, I agree! I am talking where the desires come from.

[–]ShadowPuppetGov 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Where does the desire to harm persons unable to give consent come from? It's difficult to say why we desire anything. It is one of the mysteries of the human brain.

There isn't a whole lot of discussion to be had about what pedophilia is.

[–]Pperson25 -3ポイント-2ポイント  (3子コメント)

No - research shows that paedophilia is a learned behaviour, not an uncontrollable drive like homosexuality is.

[–]sigbhu 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

this is simply not true

[–]Pperson25 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Ok well, after I actually bothered to look it up, this Guardian article says it is disputed

[–]UdenSyndIngenFrelse 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thanks, this was my question, I was not trying to condone paedophilia! I don't have so much knowledge about sexual orientation and gender etc so I am trying to keep up!

[–]EvilRethuglican#killallwhitemen 3ポイント4ポイント  (13子コメント)

Why is there generally more pedophile apologia in anarchist circles than in liberal circles? Genuine question since I've noticed this sort of thing always happens when pedophilia gets brought up here. Maybe it's exclusively an internet phenomenon? Then again, I haven't brought the subject up with comrades offline. So, who knows.

[–]ShadowPuppetGov 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's a thinly veiled attempt by concern trolls to reframe the conversation surrounding gay rights into terms of whether or not it is "natural" because that is more vague and easier to refute than "two consenting adults should be allowed to do what they want in private". This has nothing to do with anarchism.

[–]punkswcleankitchensnihilist 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't know but I find it very unsettling

[–]Father_Deerhands 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I haven't really been around here specifically enough to comment on the state of the subreddit, but I think it's mostly a reddit problem. I see it somewhat regularly outside of explicitly feminist circles on here. /r/jailbait brought a lot of traffic to the site when it was still around, and I imagine a lot of those creeps stuck around.

[–]killallpedos123 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The only solution is pedophiles is send them to Gulag, just like Stalin did for them.

[–]SpookyStirnerite 0ポイント1ポイント  (8子コメント)

Because pedophilia is a mental illness and it is by definition ableist to suggest they should be killed or persecuted for their mental illness.

[–]EvilRethuglican#killallwhitemen 0ポイント1ポイント  (7子コメント)

It's not a mental illness. It's currently classified as paraphilia, like a foot fetish. I'm not suggesting pedophiles be killed. I know some people are, and I can understand where that anger comes from. It's a reaction to the threat of normalization of pedophilia. What I'm suggesting is that pedophiles seek help, just like any dangerous habit.

[–]SpookyStirnerite 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

It's not a mental illness. It's currently classified as paraphilia, like a foot fetish.

Something being a paraphilia does not preclude it from being a mental illness.

According to the DSM-5, pedophilia is a diagnosable disorder.

What I'm suggesting is that pedophiles seek help, just like any dangerous habit.

I'm not sure what "pedophilia apologia" you've seen here then, because in the one other recent thread about pedophilia this was basically all anyone said. That pedophiles should be given counseling and not be persecuted or ostracized.

[–]EvilRethuglican#killallwhitemen 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

Pedophile apologia looks like this:

Finding children attractive is completely natural.

or

An adult should be allowed to have sex with a child because children have agency too.

or

Pedophilia is a sexual orientation, like being gay.

or

Consuming child pornography doesn't do anything to hurt the child.

I've seen different variations of each and every one of these examples posted on /r/@ at some point in time or another. Sometimes the comments get deleted or removed. Other times, they get downvoted. Every once-in-a-while, though, one of these comments gets upvoted. Regardless, I never see this sort of contrarian, devil's advocacy on /r/ShitRedditSays which highlights examples of pedophilic comments on a daily basis. SRS seems to be the one exception I've found on this site.

[–]SpookyStirnerite 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

Huh. I haven't really seen anything like that, but I have seen a lot of people saying that pedophiles should be killed or imprisoned.

Not saying those things don't get said here, I just haven't seen them.

[–]EvilRethuglican#killallwhitemen -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

Unfortunately, as I write this, the top comment in this comment section literally contains two (well, maybe three, but the first one is a blend of two) examples from my list:

Pedophilia is completely natural, like being gay

and

Consuming child pornography does not victimize children.

[–]SpookyStirnerite 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

I read it and don't see the problem with it. All they said is that pedophilia is something that's immutable just like sexual orientation and that looking at pornographic cartoons might help alleviate urges.

I agree.

[–]EvilRethuglican#killallwhitemen 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

That's why it's apologia. It shifts the argument from consent (which is what the debate boils down to) to whether or not something is "natural." Just because something is "natural" doesn't mean that it isn't extremely harmful. Further conflating pedophilia with homosexuality is a complete insult because consensual sex between two gay adults is perfectly acceptable. Sex between an adult and child cannot be consensual. Furthermore, Loli porn creates a community for pedophiles to gather and feel accepted. Making pedophilia socially acceptable is incredibly dangerous.

[–]SpookyStirnerite 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Nobody here is saying that having sex with children is okay because pedophilia is "natural", we're saying that people should not be persecuted for urges which they cannot control and which are immutable like sexual orientation. I'm gay and I don't feel offended at the comparison because it's just comparing the immutability of the urges and not the harmfulness of acting on said urges.

I'm not a sociologist so I can't really say whether or not encouraging pedophiles to look at drawn pornographic material does more harm or good. I'd think that giving them some sort of release would do more good, but I'm not really qualified here.

[–]punkswcleankitchensnihilist 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

"My sexual orientation is killing pedophiles, please respect that"

lol

[–][削除されました]  (2子コメント)

[removed]

    [–]punkswcleankitchensnihilist 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Fuck off NAMBLA. Children can't consent to sex. There's no "love" and nothing "free" in child abuse.