CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS IpsiDixit

Reward Points:10
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
100%
Arguments:10
Debates:1
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
1 point

With all due respect.

"While this makes sense, I still wouldn't consider it a sexual orientation, but rather a sexual disorder or a psychological disorder."

If it makes sense then what are you saying exactly? Just because a given society at a given period in its history chooses to criminalize a certain kind of behavior (which previously went largely unnoticed) doesn't necessarily make it a sexual or psychological disorder. People (in this case social scientists working in such in fields such as psychiatry. psychology and sociology) make the conscious decision to use science to give a veneer of legitimacy to what is, at heart, a political decision on the part of the law makers. The recent removal of homosexuality as a mental illness is a case in point: one minute science seemingly could 'prove' it to be a an illness, then next they said it's not. Just as science could one 'prove' the racial superiority of the white man over the black.

"That being said, homosexuality is a little different because I believe it's more like a chemical change in the brain that makes a man more feminine (and attracted to men) or a woman more masculine (and attracted to women)."

And in what way does this not apply to the pedophiles? Post-mortem comparisons of the brains of homosexuals and heterosexuals, together with PET/CAT-scans of living homosexuals and heterosexuals, purport to show subtle differences in brain structure between the former and the latter. This data was then used to create a theory than these bio-chemical/physio-chemical changes predisposed homosexuals to homosexuality (i.e. they were born not made). I don't now if similar studies have been carried out on self-identified pedophiles, but I presume if they were that they would draw similar conclusions. And if pedophiles are born and not made, how can we assign free will to these people? And if we can't assign free will, how can we punish them for what is it in their nature to do (the argument used to justify why we shouldn't punish homosexuals... "I just can't help myself; Can I help being born this way?).

1 point

But by that time it's already too late, they're already suffering from incipient homophobia

1 point

If the idea is to teach tolerance of sexual diversity and acceptance of people with sexual orientations different from one's own then I think it might be a good idea if done in a sensitive manner. But what about pedophiles, the transgendered and people of other, alternate sexualities - shouldn't they be represented too or is only heterosexual/homosexual allowed?

3 points

It should be nobody's business but ones own what one looks at in the privacy of ones own home in so far as no one is forced to watch or otherwise harmed. How can looking at a picture hurt someone when the picture may be decades old and the viewer had nothing to do with its production? It's just a waste of police resources.

Censorship is the closing down of thought in pursuance of an agenda by the ones doing the censoring. For that reason alone I am all for legalization of child pornography (mere possession), though not necessarily for its production.

1 point

"That, to modern society, would be repulsive. "

At the cost of seeming pedantic I would just like to point out that the Samba are modern. That is they exist at the present time and are thus our contemporaries. To use the term 'modern' in any other context (i.e. t imply that they are in some way backward/primitive) is to merely engage in ethnocentrism.

1 point

And does that go for homosexuals too? Many people consider anal sex in general and homosexual anal sex in particular repugnant and hence morally wrong. And until the 1980s and '90s in most Western European, US and Canadian jurisdictions it was illegal whether consent was given or not.

Apparently the state seems to be dictating our morals for us.

1 point

Homosexuality was once considered a mental illness by the same people who now consider pedosexuality to be so. But now it's okay. The reason: gay and lesbian activism. Such militant activism by pedophile groups could bring about a similar result for pedophilia.

When the psychiatric profession uses moral, social and political criteria for the diagnosis of mental illness rather than purely scientific criteria it cannot be trusted and brings itself into disrepute. What goes for homosexuality should logically follow for pedophilia too. To do otherwise would not make sense.

3 points

"Can you really not draw a distinction between two consenting adults in a relationship, and an adult who psychologically manipulates or physically forces a child into sex?"

Who gets to say what 'consenting' means and do adults really manipulate children they way you assume?

"Who is the victim in a homosexual relationship?"

The answer: society. Society may deem homosexuality to be just too disruptive and corruptive to be acceptable. (Isn't this the reason, after all, it was banned in the first place?)

"But luckily, people are not on the same level of brain function as animals anymore, and we do not have to mold our entire lives around the imperative to have children, if we don't want to.

That's right. And what goes for homosexuals and heterosexuals goes for pedosexuals too: you no longer have to be bound by an outdated system that pigeon-holes pepole according to their sexuality.

2 points

"Well Pedophilia is not a sexual orientation, for starters."

To say that a persons sexual orientation (i.e. the group that they identify themselves as being sexually attracted to) is not a sexual orientation is a non sequitor of the highest order. Meaning it is a logical absurdity and makes no sense at all. For instance, a homosexual, presumably, identifies their sexual orientation as being directed primarily or exclusively towards members of the same sex/gender. Similarly, a heterosexual would identify themselves as being sexually attracted to (that is, having a sexual orientation towards) members of the opposite sex/gender. I'm sure you would agree - no? Ergo, it logically follows that a pedosexual, by being primarily or exclusively attracted to prepubescent children and peri-pubescent youth, has also a 'sexual orientation'. Yes?

1 point

I'm in two minds here.

Most regular pornography (in particular, the genre known as 'Gonzo porn') shouldn't be viewed by people below their teens because it gives them a totally false view of human sexuality: it treats women (and to a lesser extent, men) as sexual playthings, teaches forms of sex which are painful or bizarre (anal sex, deep throat oral sex, double penetration, fisting, etc.) and, as a result, may be prone to giving young minds a completely false idea of sex, and is completely lacking in the human emotion of love.

On the other hand, if it were possible - a big 'IF', in my opinion - to make pornography (call it erotica if you want) which portrayed human sexuality in a the context of a relationship based upon love, trust, etc. then it shouldn't hurt anyone. Indeed, it could even be used in lessons on sex education in schools.

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here