Paedophilia: Where do you draw the line?
Is it ever ok for an adult to have a sexual relationship with a minor? What difference does consent make, if any? What about a minor who is significantly below the age of consent?
Is child pornography ever ok? What about when it's cartoon porn and no real children are involved in the production? What about child sex dolls? Erotic writings involving children?
All of it is unacceptable
Side Score: 9
|
 |
Some forms are acceptable
Side Score: 9
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
2
points
Paedophilia: Where do you draw the line? Pedophilia specifically refers to a sexual relationship between a person who is at least 16, and at least 5 years older than their prepubescent victim. The line is already drawn, and there is no situation in which pedophilia is not wrong. Is it ever ok for an adult to have a sexual relationship with a minor? Something like a 17 year old having sex with a 19 year old technically falls within this realm but I think many people would not consider this a big deal. Also, it is not pedophilia. What difference does consent make, if any? Well, a lack of consent makes all the difference. But for cases of minors (not prepubescent children) having consensual sex with adults, I would think it would depend on their dynamic, the size of the age gap and the age of the minor. The younger a person is, and the more they see the adult as a figure of authority, the easier it would be for the adult to coerce or manipulate them into granting consent. Is child pornography ever ok? What about when it's cartoon porn and no real children are involved in the production? What about child sex dolls? Erotic writings involving children? Actual child pornography is unacceptable. Animated or literary depictions of it might make most people uncomfortable, but they do not actually inflict harm on a real victim thus should not be criminal. I do not put much stock in the idea that watching a certain type of pornographic material will actually create an urge to participate in the depicted acts, but I suppose if there were data to the contrary I would reconsider. Side: All of it is unacceptable
I'm referring to paedophilia in its dictionary sense rather than in its legal sense. The latter would vary according to jurisdiction, and in any case I wanted to hear what people think of paedophilia, rather than what people know is the law regarding paedophilia. paedophilia or pedophilia: the condition of being sexually attracted to children (Dictionary.com) I'm not really thinking that much of 17yos pairing with 19yos, as most people don't have a problem with that, and in many countries it's not even illegal. I'm thinking of more borderline cases - say, a 16yo pairing with a 12yo. Would something like that be necessarily immoral? I'm split on this issue, really. And even in the case of young prepubescent children, I think it is possible for them to have sexual fantasies or desires, though they won't register them as sexual, and will not have sexual arousal or orgasm in the form that is familiar to adults. I'm not saying that this necessarily justifies adults having sexual relationships with children - just saying that I think this has some bearing on the debate concerning what is what sort of exposure to sexual activities is acceptable for children at various ages. And here's another scenario I just came across last night in the news: What about when an adult fondles the genitals of a baby in a sexual manner, but doesn't do anything that would physically hurt the baby? This is a case of the "victim" being so young that they don't know what is happening and will never remember what happened (hence there is no psychological trauma). How wrong is this, on a scale from "nothing wrong with it" to "Hitleresque evil"? I agree with your view that porn that doesn't use real children is acceptable. In fact, it's possible that by giving paedophiles a sexual outlet in the form of drawn/written child porn, they will be less inclined to seek out other means that can hurt real children - as well as hurt their reputations if they get caught. Side: Some forms are acceptable
I'm referring to paedophilia in its dictionary sense rather than in its legal sense. The latter would vary according to jurisdiction, and in any case I wanted to hear what people think of paedophilia, rather than what people know is the law regarding paedophilia. paedophilia or pedophilia: the condition of being sexually attracted to children (Dictionary.com) The definition I provided is the correct technical definition of pedophilia according to the American Psychiatric Association. Dictionary definitions, like the one you provided, make it semantically possible for an 11 year old to be considered a pedophile if they are attracted to another 11 year old. Other definitions exclude the possibility of a 17 year old attracted to 8 year olds from being a pedophile, by specifically defining it as an adult feeling the attraction. This is not to say one can't have a discussion about other gray areas of attraction, just that I think it's important to define what pedophilia is and isn't. When it comes to actual pedophilia, there is no gray area. And even in the case of young prepubescent children, I think it is possible for them to have sexual fantasies or desires, though they won't register them as sexual, and will not have sexual arousal or orgasm in the form that is familiar to adults. I'm not saying that this necessarily justifies adults having sexual relationships with children - just saying that I think this has some bearing on the debate concerning what is what sort of exposure to sexual activities is acceptable for children at various ages. It is considered absolutely normal for prepubescent children to explore this through interaction with their peers, like 'playing doctor'. Children tend to engineer situations where they can experiment while still feeling safe, equal, and in control, and it seems to me that an adult or a much older figure of authority would not factor into these games. Even if they did, an adult who either deliberately steered interactions in this direction, or allowed interactions to move in that direction, would absolutely be in the wrong. And here's another scenario I just came across last night in the news: What about when an adult fondles the genitals of a baby in a sexual manner, but doesn't do anything that would physically hurt the baby? This is a case of the "victim" being so young that they don't know what is happening and will never remember what happened (hence there is no psychological trauma). How wrong is this, on a scale from "nothing wrong with it" to "Hitleresque evil"? Yeah, I am not sure where to place that on a specific scale. But, the mindset required to commandeer the body of anyone for personal gratification, whether or not they are a child and whether or not it will be traumatic to them, is pretty disgusting. Side: All of it is unacceptable
NOT ACCEPTABLE EVER! IF IT IS A CHILD LIKE A 12 YR OLD KID AND HIS/HER SEXY ASS MOFO TEACHER (I MEAN UNDERWARE MODEL HOT!!) AND THE TEACHER IS 20 OR EVEN 19 IT IS STILL WRONG. and all so child porn is gross wtf are you gonna get out of child pron when adults can do much more w/out the risk of you geting arested. and the whole child sex toy thing wtf is that some one should n't even be allowed to think about something like that!!!!!!!!!! like really that is gross can you amagin some one having a vibrater with your face on it an old creepy looking lady. yeah not cool!!! Side: All of it is unacceptable
1
point
All of that is horrible. It's disgusting. My only thing is...sometimes ....hmmm....well i mean what if your 17 year old was with a 20 year old? They're only a few years apart, and what if they're meant to be together you know? Idk. All I know is that child pornography is the most disgusting thing I've ever heard of. Side: All of it is unacceptable
|
Generally speaking, sexual relationships between a minor and an older adult will be exploitative, because it will be a case of the adult imposing himself upon the child. In some unusual cases however, it stems from a mentor relationship, or even a sort of kinky desire to sleep with one's father or mother (this is called age play) and it's quite conceivable that some technically underage men and women may fantasize about having this kind of relationship with an older person. In our society this is frowned upon because of the stigma against teen sex. Perhaps a more complicated matter is child pornography. These days children themselves are making it faster than it can be taken down. They do this as part of their sexual exploration with others in their age group. The prohibition on child pornography therefore causes problems for these youths. Then there is the already existing material on the internet. Much of it does involve the exploitation of young children, child prostitutes, abuse from fathers and mothers, etc. However, I can not determine a clear reason for the prohibition of ownership of such materials, only the production of it (where the child is being abused). My argument therefore is that this is far from a simple, black and white issue. Children have sex with each other, some seek relationships with older people, yet more produce pornography of themselves. If we can get past the stigma, maybe we can figure out a reasonable way to deal with this. Side: Some forms are acceptable
I believe some forms are slightly more acceptable than other, but the concept as a whole is unacceptable. I believe forms of it that don't involve real children in ANY WAY are more acceptable, because the most unacceptable thing about the concept of paedophilia according to me is when children are exploited or damaged in some way (either by traumatizing them, by sexually exploiting them, raping them, etc). But anyway it do not believe paedophilia is ok. Side: some forms are more acceptable than othe
One day - the world will finally tire of this stupidity, and realise that the pedophilia witch-hunt is all about the hunters, not the prey. People need an evil to fight. The next fad will be to condemn anyone who presumes to deny a child whatever they want - because they are after all real people, whose free choices should be respected. Far from kids being 'incapable of giving consent' (whatever THAT is supposed to mean?), kids will be in control. It will be an offence to interfere with a child's freedom. People are like sheep. Side: Some forms are acceptable
|
