1
   

Is 'liking children' wrong, if you don't harm kids?

 
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2007 04:33 pm
Re: Is 'liking children' wrong, if you don't harm kids?
Thomas wrote:
neologist wrote:
I recommend the first step is to ask a lawyer for advice. (Clergy, maybe.)

I agree about the lawyer, and would substitute the clergy with a psychotherapist.
Agreed. But in some states of the US, shrinks are requires to report cases of abuse. So, if you already have crossed the line, the lawyer might be your best bet. A good lawyer can direct you to a good therapist.

I hope if there are any here reading this thread who have these inclinations, you will realize that your situation is not hopeless. If you live in the state of Washington and you or a family member needs help, pm me for the emails of a few people who can be trusted. My wife and I have been friends for many years with an outstanding husband and wife team.
0 Replies
 
littlejim26
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 May, 2011 10:07 pm
@The Pentacle Queen,
What about dreaming of sexual relations with young men? I frequently dream of a 10yo boy who for whatever reason was being very sexual towards me. We were both in swim suits and he wanted to wrestle. We played around fora few minutes and then kissed me on the lips. Later on that night I was asleep and I woke up with him in the bed with me playing with my privates. .I was horrified at first and left the next morning but know I'm having dreams about it from time to time. The dreams get very sexual and when I wake up I'm even had nocturnal emissions it really makes me feel like a pervert. Why is this happening to me
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 May, 2011 02:45 am
I've often wondered whether pedophilia is a genetic condition. Irrespective of whether or not genetics are involved - I think we all agree that it is most certainly still wrong.

In regards to whether or not it's genetics, it was the bell curve that caused me to wonder whether it was truly genetic. The bell curve is a graph used in statistics, and it is (obviously) shaped like a bell. Almost all human characteristics, when charted statistically, match this curve - wealth, intelligence, strength etc.

Having worked in an industry with a high percentage of lesbians, I did ask two of them that I got along with quite well whether or not they had ever been attracted to men, as far back as they could remember, and both replied that they had always been attracted purely to girls, even as young teenagers (something that is explainable by the bell curve)

It seems to me that in every sexual inclination the bell curve is easily displayed.

The bell curve also seems to perfectly match the percentage of pure gay/lesbians in our society, and arguably may also match the pure hetero, and the bi's in between. Following the bell curve, there would be some lesbians with slight hetero tendancies, a fairly decent percentage of bi women, some hetero's with some lesbian tendencies, pure hetero's (would be the majority)...and a similar reflection for men. It's quite easy to see the women match up to the bell curve, less easy to see the men match up to it - though there may be rather obvious explanations for this.

Having taken this concept further - it may be that other sexual inclinations are genetic traits. I wonder this because it seems that pedophiles are non-rehabilitable. Certainly the reoffence rate amongst those convicted and jailed is incredibly high.

Having said all that - as stated at the beginning - even if it is a natural trait, it's irrelevant, for it is still wrong, and any offenders still need to be jailed. Preying upon the innocent / trusting / reliant / and weak (to whom adults are given the care of), and wrecking their lives, simply can't be tolerated.

snood
 
  6  
Reply Sat 7 May, 2011 07:35 am
On this whole notion of "Is it wrong if I'm just thinking about it, and not doing it?"...

In my opinion it isn't a good thing to be entertaining fantasies about doing something you would find wrong to actually do. I think it sets up a dissonance internally that potentially malfunctions your moral compass. If I constantly allow myself to think about murdering a person I dislike and about how satisfying it would be, I think the lines between acceptable and unacceptable behavior toward that person might move.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 May, 2011 07:39 am
@snood,
Right. Indulgence of such fantasies likely weakens moral resolve. "Well, we're alone, and no one would know -" type of thinking could follow.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 May, 2011 06:16 pm
Let me make a picky point. A person who loves children is called a "pedophile" even if he could not imagine relating to children sexually. The person who can imagine (or does) such a thing is rightly called a"pederast." But I guess we're stuck with not having a term for the innocent love of children. It's crazy.
snood
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 May, 2011 10:40 pm
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:

Let me make a picky point. A person who loves children is called a "pedophile" even if he could not imagine relating to children sexually. The person who can imagine (or does) such a thing is rightly called a"pederast." But I guess we're stuck with not having a term for the innocent love of children. It's crazy.

What's crazy is having to categorize if your love is "innocent" or not. I guess if you've got to think about it, it ain't.
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 May, 2011 11:14 pm
@snood,
What I meant to say, Snood, was that "pedophilia" literally means love of children, not abuser of children. The only word I know that refers to such sexual abuse is pederasty, but perhaps I should consult a good dictionary/thesaurus.
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2011 06:08 am
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:

What I meant to say, Snood, was that "pedophilia" literally means love of children, not abuser of children. The only word I know that refers to such sexual abuse is pederasty, but perhaps I should consult a good dictionary/thesaurus.


I guess I get your point, but then the English language is known to morph over changing times and mores. I can think of a dozen words whose "literal" meanings have changed over the last 20 years.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2011 06:47 am
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:
A person who loves children is called a "pedophile" even if he could not imagine relating to children sexually.

I have never heard anyone use the word "pedophile" in this sense. And for what it's worth, neither has Webster's dictionary. It defines pedophile as "someone affected by pedophilia" and pedophilia as "a sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object". Also, Webster marks the word as being "new Latin" and the time of its first known use as 1906. I'm pretty sure the word has always been used this way.
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2011 06:00 pm
@Thomas,
O.K., so that's what is usage today. I was thinking simply of Pedo (child) and Philia (love). But I acknowledge that philology and etymology are not adequate for doing sociology: meanings change.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 May, 2011 10:29 pm
@Mame,
Mame wrote:

But... why is this so wrong if nobody procreates?


Accidents happen and abnormal births result.
0 Replies
 
nothingtodo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Dec, 2012 10:07 pm
@The Pentacle Queen,
Prettiness is all ages.. sometimes so is handsomeness, I think it drives mankind to plow the brown trough to avoid the truth.. Just call a spade a ******* spade. Do not touch... Do not look too long under God.
0 Replies
 
cefur
 
  1  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2012 11:49 am
@CalamityJane,
Very little? In don't think so...if you understand the consequences and how your action can destroy some ones life... then you only watch the cake and you never dare try eating it....

"very little" is only your own point of view.... I disagree.

JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2012 12:21 pm
@cefur,
Let's put it this way, pedophilia is ambiguous--it can refer to innocuous love for children OR sexual desire for children. Pederasty is unambiguous--it refers only to the latter. We see it as destructive, and rightly so. Spartan society instituionalized it as virtuous. Cultural relativism! I for one find it destructively abusive.
0 Replies
 
nothingtodo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 31 Dec, 2012 08:15 pm
@vikorr,
You do realize 'God' and associates orchestrate the bell curve, right?.
It has been so accurately in motion since WWII, When genetic mapping first began (circa).
My dear pretty and healthy people, have you ever wondered why you are deemed superior, when still you fail on certain questions repetitively?. That is why. Genetics has zero to do with your life experience and the choices you make, living is all of it.
0 Replies
 
Enchanted1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Jul, 2013 12:25 pm
@The Pentacle Queen,
It is very wrong to be attracted to children, children can't consent or protect themselves. Morally wrong as you may act on those feelings. Society should be here to protect children not harm them. Please seek professional help if you feel this way, so cognitive behavioural therapy or other therapies can be iniated if a professional deems it appropriate.
0 Replies
 
Tabs
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Jul, 2013 02:24 am
@The Pentacle Queen,
There is nothing inherently wrong with arousal. Being aroused is a healthy response to being alive. Men often awake with "morning wood", teenage boys maybe aroused for 3-4 hours a day for absolutely no reason at all. Being aroused is not a problem.
Trouble only arises after a habitual fixation over time mutates into unhealthy neurotic behavior interfering with one's ability to function normally in life.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with 'liking children', so long as it doesn't harm you and it doesn't harm them. People who do not like children, and those who cannot see the beauty in them, they are typically more dangerous and wrong than those who seem particularly fond or child-friendly.
Appreciating kids is nice and natural. Obsessive fantasizing is inappropriate and best avoided.
Most people who harm kids don't actually like them.
0 Replies
 
Sonya Yetsofah
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Oct, 2013 12:16 am
I have read some BL's and GL's talking about boycotting all countries that pass laws against them. This would include not buying their products and not traveling to those countries as tourists or businesspeople. First on the list would be the USA, and UK.
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Apr, 2014 09:32 pm
@The Pentacle Queen,
English stage actress Ellen Terry was married at age 16 to George Frederic Watts who was 46 year old, a marriage her parents thought would be advantageous; later she said she was uncomfortable being a child bride. Terry passed away at the age of 81, in 1928. quote from wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_marriage#Causes_of_child_marriage

every thing considered wrong has been considered ok in other society's. but idk
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/07/2019 at 02:42:04