Sheriff: Father kills man sexually abusing his daughter

[pat grimshaw]

^
I prophesize that the definitions regarding pedophilia will change in the coming decades when we learn more about them.

 

[fetaby]

In medical and psychological academic circles, pedophilia is not a sexual orientation. Sexual orientation involves gender, not age. Anyone who equates or even compares sexuality to pedophilia is just mistaken.

This is from a medical dictionary:



---

Again, it isn't about age. Sexual orientation is just about gender. If you don't like this definition, write a letter to the APA and AMA and tell them how much more you know then they do.

Comparisons are made when things that deal with the same thing (sex, attraction) differ. Which is not an equalization of the two.

So if we were to make a comparison between anything without the peanut gallery clutching its pearls, I'd choose pedophilia and bestiality. Both recognized attractions, both universally hated. But the difference between how we react to them differs quite a bit. IF someone rapes a kid, it's kill them no questions asked. IF someone fucks a horse, they get ostracized.

So why aren't we out there killing horse fuckers?

- - - Updated - - -

In medical and psychological academic circles, pedophilia is not a sexual orientation. Sexual orientation involves gender, not age. Anyone who equates or even compares sexuality to pedophilia is just mistaken.

This is from a medical dictionary:



---

Again, it isn't about age. Sexual orientation is just about gender. If you don't like this definition, write a letter to the APA and AMA and tell them how much more you know then they do.

Comparisons are made when things that deal with the same thing (sex, attraction) differ. Which is not an equalization of the two.

So if we were to make a comparison between anything without the peanut gallery clutching its pearls, I'd choose pedophilia and bestiality. Both recognized attractions, both universally hated. But the difference between how we react to them differs quite a bit. IF someone rapes a kid, it's kill them no questions asked. IF someone fucks a horse, they get ostracized.

So why aren't we out there killing horse fuckers?

 

[fetaby]

It was through further discovery and the maturing of the fields. Many of these fields a half century ago or so thought shock therapy was appropriate. Asides from that I wasn't talking about what the APA and AMA considered a mental disorder a time ago. I was talking about current medical and psychological definitions on the term "Sexual orientation".

In the last thirty years, medical and psychological health fields have come a long way in understanding people better.

Nice attempt at a strawman though.

Not a strawman, nice attempt at red herring.

You speak of these professions as finite fields of inquiry. Well, they're not done yet. And one of the reasons why English is favored vs. other languages is that it isn't dead either. It changes. As thoughts change, as knowledge changes, definitions change as well.

Besides, isn't the word Homosexual relatively young itself? Yeah, 1895...

 

[frankfrank]

I don't really care what you prophesize. You haven't backed up your statements with any substance.

When one says they're editorializing or expressing an opinion, further citations may be good to have but they're not necessary. Prophesizing, when not necessarily backed up by research, is basically one of the lesser-used ways of expressing an opinion - a "gut feeling" or such. I accept it as a statement of what he's guessing is likely to happen in the future - no more, no less - and I take it as "It is what it is."

 

[fetaby]

I didn't claim they were done yet. There is obviously more investigation that can be done, especially with regards to transgendered and transsexual people. However, I don't see further research changing the terms regarding pedophilia which will remain a psychiatric disorder.

Don't you have a law degree?

What do you know of the research that may or may not be occurring?

Besides, this was never about the terminology but rather the consequence of the diagnosis and the efficacy of treatment. Unless you are now wanting to deny that psychiatric disorders have treatments.


And a poor attempt to create distance between homosexuals and pedophiles. It's unnecessary and obstructionist.

 

[fetaby]

I'll stop you right here. Sexual preference implies a conscious choice, and it is indeed an outdated term that is no longer used among the APA and AMA

You do realize that the DSM-IV and ICD-10 is used by the APA, yes? The same APA you claim isn't using it?

"Nepiophilia is used to refer to a sexual preference for infants and toddlers (usually ages 0–3), pedophilia is used for individuals with a primary sexual interest in prepubescent children aged 13 or younger,[1] and hebephilia is defined as individuals with a primary sexual interest in 11-14 year old pubescents. The DSM IV does not list hebephilia among the diagnoses, while the ICD-10 includes hebephilia in its pedophilia definition, covering the physical development overlap between the two philias. - ^ Laws, D. Richard; William T. O'Donohue (2008). Sexual Deviance: Theory, Assessment, and Treatment. Guilford Press. p. 176. ISBN 1-59385-605-9. & - Blanchard R, Lykins AD, Wherrett D, et al. (June 2009). "Pedophilia, hebephilia, and the DSM-V". Arch Sex Behav 38 (3): 335–50. DOI:10.1007/s10508-008-9399-9. PMID 18686026.

"The ICD-10 defines pedophilia as "a sexual preference for children, boys or girls or both, usually of prepubertal or early pubertal age." Under this system's criteria, a person 16 years of age or older meets the definition if they have a persistent or predominant sexual preference for prepubescent children at least five years younger than them." - ^ a b c d World Health Organization, International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems: ICD-10 Section F65.4: Paedophilia (online access via ICD-10 site map table of contents)

 

[fetaby]

Where is the attempt to create distance between homosexuals and pedophiles.

Post #263

Anyone who equates or even compares sexuality to pedophilia is just mistaken.

Notice I was talking about sexuality in general, and not about homosexuality.

Dat's nice. Notice that between homosexuality and heterosexuality, which of the two has been "linked" to pedophilia by those with axes to grind? You don't see the HRC coming out saying gays will molest your kids. You don't see ActUp attempting to place adoption bans on state ballots "to save the children."

The culture of war between homosexuals and heterosexuals have successfully used pedophilia as a battle axe for decades and as a result the ones being hit with the blow are very unwilling to even discuss the subject.

Meanwhile the non-discussion of pedophilia has placed the subject so far into the dark recesses of taboo, the people who do suffer from those attractions are only now starting to get treatments and therapies. Only now is research being done to understand and help these people not do the things their mind is telling them to do. So in our reluctance to tackle this, pedophiles go cockroach. They hide. And more kids get hurt.

Kinda ironic considering it's the protection of kids which is the goal.

 

[fetaby]

Those terms need to be updated. Sexual preference, as proved by the source I provided, is outdated. In addition, pedophilia is not a sexual preference.

Perhaps you need to take your own advice?

If you don't like this definition, write a letter to the APA and AMA and tell them how much more you know then they do.

Do you actually want to discuss what I posted? Or are you going to engage in a red herring argument?

When you post something worth discussing I might. Besides I'm not discussing with you what you wrote. I'm answering the question you asked in reference to what I posted.

Where is the attempt to create distance between homosexuals and pedophiles.

Referencing:

And a poor attempt to create distance between homosexuals and pedophiles. It's unnecessary and obstructionist.

Now follow me here... If you don't want to draw a comparison on the two because you fear their similarities then you do want to create a distance/ a divide that can't be engulfed.

 

[fetaby]

What similarities?

They both involve attractions. They both involve sex.

And for several posts you have been extremely condescending, even insulting my educational background. Lets just review here, maybe if you could argue in a more adult like manner, I'll give your arguments the time of day.

Now I'm going to be condescending.

Asking you if you have a law degree is not an attack. It's a question. Which you chose to answer, btw. Not having a law degree is an insult? Well I guess I must be offended with you because I don't have one either.

I asked because IIRC, that is your area of study, not medicine. And as a student of law, why would you be intimate with the research of psychologists? How would you know what they are studying?

Of course you can read the papers once they're published, but have you? Will you?

 

[fetaby]

Actually I have. Have you? Will you?

What is your area of study?

No, and no. Maybe if you give me a nickel...

Stand-up philosopher.

 

[pat grimshaw]

OMG, who's going to get the last word?

 

[fetaby]

Okay, so that's being hypocritical. I think you just destroyed your own credibility here.

It's only hypocritical if I pretended to know what I was talking about. I wasn't the one claiming what the APA uses, only to be proven wrong. I wasn't the one honing my argument towards "this is the way it is, don't compare apples to oranges". I wasn't the one who grudgingly admitted that the status of homosexuality had changed recently within the DSM-IV while alluding that no changes could or should be made in the case of pedophilia. And lastly I'm not the one who brought out this argument anyway, that was you in post #263.

 

[fetaby]

OMG, who's going to get the last word?

Either way, will you be watching?

 

[fetaby]

Oh please. You just showed your own inconsistency. I've provided definitions and you took and it, twisting everything in the process. You do not have credibility here anymore. Pedophilia does not infer gender, it's about age. Hence it has no relevance to homosexual or heterosexuality.

Thanks for self destructing your own argument.

Then untwist it if you can.

Not once, did anyone claim pedophilia did infer gender. But that doesn't mean it has no relation to homo or hetero sexuality. It is after all a sexual deviation classified as a disorder.

My argument, (whether you want to debate it or not) has remained consistent. In that as gay men who have been beaten down with the label pedophile, we have a natural tendency to want to disassociate from that to the detriment of all.

 

[fetaby]

No it's completely inconsistent and it's weak at best. And that inference about wanting to disassociate with it is a red herring...

By the way, many pedophiles are actually heterosexual, but that's beyond the f-king point.

If my argument is weak and inconsistent then you'll have no trouble proving it by taking my words and explaining why. Just saying it is so doesn't mean it is so. This thread itself is a testament to my argument. Gay man upon gay man congratulating the death of another human (albeit sick).

But I'll go on to say that not just many but MOST pedophiles are heterosexual by way of percentages.

But here's a good link explaining my argument, if you care to read it.

Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation

 

[fetaby]

And all you have done is just say so. Now you're saying that homosexuality is the same as child molestation? Your argument isn't explained by that link. Maybe you need to actually state what your argument is. Pedophilia isn't about sexual orientation. And by the way, I know people in the past would compare homosexuality to pedophilia in order to discredit... but... that isn't a valid argument to begin with.

Oh by the way, go back in this thread... I wanted the father prosecuted because I felt he went pass justifiable limits (and considering as it turns out the man wasn't abusing his daughter when he walked in).

Since you seem to not be able to read tonight...

In that as gay men who have been beaten down with the label pedophile, we have a natural tendency to want to disassociate from that to the detriment of all.

Since you seem to not be able to read tonight...

You:

Now you're saying that homosexuality is the same as child molestation?

No. I'm saying they (heterosexuality is included in this also) revolve around attractions. I'm saying they deal with sexual expression.

You:

Your argument isn't explained by that link. Maybe you need to actually state what your argument is.

You don't read that fast.

In a similar fashion, gay people have often been portrayed as a threat to children. Back in 1977, when Anita Bryant campaigned successfully to repeal a Dade County (FL) ordinance prohibiting anti-gay discrimination, she named her organization "Save Our Children," and warned that "a particularly deviant-minded [gay] teacher could sexually molest children" (Bryant, 1977, p. 114). [Bibliographic references are on a different web page]

In recent years, antigay activists have routinely asserted that gay people are child molesters. This argument was often made in debates about the Boy Scouts of America's policy to exclude gay scouts and scoutmasters. More recently, in the wake of Rep. Mark Foley's resignation from the US House of Representatives in 2006, antigay activists and their supporters seized on the scandal to revive this canard.

It has also been raised in connection with scandals about the Catholic church's attempts to cover up the abuse of young males by priests. Indeed, the Vatican's early response to the 2002 revelations of widespread Church cover-ups of sexual abuse by priests was to declare that gay men should not be ordained.

Because of ^ that. It is natural for gay men to want to disassociate themselves from anything to do with pedophilia. Before you know it, we have our very own special type of lynch mobs forming to prove that not only are we not pedophiles but we hate them even more than the straights. It's classic defiance behavior, surely you picked up on that during your undergrad studies. And that is my argument.

In that as gay men who have been beaten down with the label pedophile, we have a natural tendency to want to disassociate from that to the detriment of all.

 

[fetaby]

That's all nice to hear, but I'm actually disassociating pedophilia with sexual orientation, not just homosexuality. You seem to think it is natural for me to disassociate it with homosexuality, but you're still missing the point. I think it'll be wrong to assume you'll actually read my posts? You are the one who doesn't seem to be willing to read tonight. It's evident in your knee jerk replies.

Got anything else to pull out of thin air? This has nothing to do with straights versus gays. Classic defiance behavior? Who made you a specialist in this field?

And take a look at my f-king responses earlier in this thread please.

(since you love to overuse this emoticon).

Protip: Make sure the words you are using actual fit the context in which you wish to place them. Parroting a key word from your antagonist's post does not mean your response will be coherent.

Disassociating pedophilia FROM sexual orientation isn't necessary because it's not the same. It has never been argued by me, or anyone else, that it is the same. IT does have some similarities (already mentioned) and dragging your feet on this isn't going to change that. Nor will putting on a pair of blinders and trying to steamroll the discussion to fit into your narrow parameters of debate.

Conclusion

The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not to argue that homosexual and bisexual men never molest children. But there is no scientific basis for asserting that they are more likely than heterosexual men to do so. And, as explained above, many child molesters cannot be characterized as having an adult sexual orientation at all; they are fixated on children.

But the reason I'm harping on the fact that I believe gay men run from this topic they way they do is because this is JUB. This is a gay forum, full of gay men. And instead of taking an objective look at what happened in Texas it was page after page of "attaboy" and non-discussion similar to:

Now you're saying that homosexuality is the same as child molestation?

I actually liked what you had to say earlier in the thread, but come post #263 you seemed to have went off the rail. And for what? To prove something that doesn't need to be proven.

 

[fetaby]

There are no similarities between sexual orientation and pedophilia, and you have been putting on your blinders all day long here.

As has already been stated (repeatedly) there are similarities. If you'd like to disprove that then take these two similarities and tell me how they don't apply to all three, homosexuality, heterosexuality, and pedophilia.

Attraction. One person being attracted towards another.

Expression. Any form of action or behavior relating to those attractions.
-----

When you make the claim that those similarities don't exist, you create an atmosphere of some other website and division. You help create an us vs. them world, and in that world people die. In that world, pedophiles don't seek treatment. In that world, they express their attractions and children get hurt.

So please tell me, why it is if you don't like lynch mobs why it's so fucking important to you to hold on to the argument you started in post #263 against tiexgrr? Why are you coming after him? As I see it, he's one of the few in this thread willing to actually have this discussion with a goal towards humanely dealing with all the people involved in these situations.

You can't make the claim that you are for treatment and studies and understanding and still cling to the argument in 263.

 

[fetaby]

There are no similarities

Disprove that.

That was the charge. That is your argument, that is your responsibility to defend.

I've produced two similarities, attraction and expression.

Gay attraction = sexual attraction between like genders
Hetero attraction = sexual attraction between opposite genders
Pedophile = sexual attraction to children

All three share the ~similiarity~ of an attraction.

Expression... When any of the three act on their attractions...

--------------

I'm placing you in my ignore list... ciao.

I'm sure I'll be in good company.

 

[bankside]

I don't particularly care about debating the etiology of pedophilia. And if it is an inherent orientation or however people choose to define it, then it doesn't equate any more to homosexuality than it does to heterosexuality - both established orientations.

The bottom line is being a pedophile, however that occurred, means being a person with a propensity to violate the sexual privacy of children. And being a pedophile is, as such, unacceptable. Any person who is one should have a legal duty to use any and all medical means necessary to eliminate the propensity. If treatment options are ineffective, there is no human right available to the pedophile which overrules the need to safeguard the integrity of someone's childhood.