Religion and Ethics Forum

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: floo on December 29, 2017, 10:58:49 AM

Title: Paedophiles
Post by: floo on December 29, 2017, 10:58:49 AM
deleted
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Harrowby Hall on December 29, 2017, 11:33:28 AM
Just so that we are absolutely clear about this subject, LR, what exactly do you mean by paedophile?
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Rhiannon on December 29, 2017, 12:01:21 PM
Finding young children sexually attractive isn't a crime. Presumably you mean keeping children safe from paedophiles who act on their attraction?
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Harrowby Hall on December 29, 2017, 12:04:19 PM
Someone who finds young children sexually attractive.

Thank you. By "young" I assume you mean prepubescent.
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: BeRational on December 29, 2017, 02:05:54 PM
Any child under 16.

I agree but it also depends to some extent on the age of the older one of the two.

A 16 year old with a 15 year old is not the same to me ad a 36 year old with a 15 year old.

So, it's not just one of them being under 16 as far as I am concerned.
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: BeRational on December 29, 2017, 02:14:13 PM
I am talking about an adult 18+ knowingly having sex with someone under 16. Children under 16 should be strongly discouraged from having sex with each other.

Just pointing out you said any child under 16, and I wanted to make the point that for me a 16 year old with a 15 year old, would meet your definition of a paedophile,  but I do not agree with that
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Nearly Sane on December 29, 2017, 02:25:55 PM
Apart from the obvious issue that HH is pointing out that paedophilia is about attraction to prepubescents, see definition below, we seem to be moving inconsistently between attraction and having sex with people on this thread. Are we saying that anyone who finds someone who is 15 years 364 days 23 hours and 59 minutes sexually attractive is a deviant bit one minute later a bit of look at the arse on that one becomes fine?



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: BeRational on December 29, 2017, 02:30:10 PM
My definition of a paedophile is an adult 18+ who is sexually attracted to prepubescent. It is illegal for an adult 18+ to have sex with someone under 16. Adults are classified as paedophiles if they are sexually attracted and/or have sex with a child of 13 and under.

No one has yet suggested how paedophiles should be prevented from harming children.

The sexually  attracted bit is a problem for me, how would you ever know?

Plus just because they are attracted does not mean they will act on it.

Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Humph Warden Bennett on December 29, 2017, 02:48:25 PM
My definition of a paedophile is an adult 18+ who is sexually attracted to prepubescent. It is illegal for an adult 18+ to have sex with someone under 16. Adults are classified as paedophiles if they are sexually attracted and/or have sex with a child of 13 and under.

No one has yet suggested how paedophiles should be prevented from harming children.

You cannot, any more than you can stop driving whilst intoxicated.
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Nearly Sane on December 29, 2017, 02:49:50 PM
You cannot, any more than you can stop driving whilst intoxicated.
and yet since that was reduced, you can reduce it, so what would you do to do that?
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Humph Warden Bennett on December 29, 2017, 03:16:22 PM
and yet since that was reduced, you can reduce it, so what would you do to do that?

Has that been reduced? How do you know that it has been reduced?
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Nearly Sane on December 29, 2017, 03:33:05 PM
Has that been reduced? How do you know that it has been reduced?


Yes. See the stats on drunk driving.
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Nearly Sane on December 29, 2017, 04:04:57 PM
This thread isn't about drunk driving! ::)

And no one has said it is. Rather the discussion is that you can take action to change behaviour or not.
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: jeremyp on December 29, 2017, 08:33:01 PM
Any child under 16.
That isn't young children, that is all children or almost all of them depending on how you classify 16 to 18 year olds. I'm not saying you are wrong to set 16 as the limit, but, hopefully, you are aware that the situation is not black and white when people get to be in their mid to late teens.
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Harrowby Hall on December 30, 2017, 10:43:15 AM
"Children" who are post-pubertal do not regard themselves as children. If anything, they are incomplete adults rather than children. Paradoxically, they possess the most potent capability of adulthood, the ability to reproduce, but in bodies which are not quite fully formed and with brains which are not yet completely developed.

Frequently, their bodies are extremely attractive, approximating to the "ideal" of their sex - slim, tall, shapely (as appropriate), with good skin and (as yet) unaffected by gravity or poor eating habits. Girls typically achieve maturity perhaps one and a half to two years earlier than boys. To find them attractive is no problem in itself but to translate the perception of this attractiveness, by people in full adulthood, into sexual activity - which, possibly, may even be welcome - is a betrayal of responsible adulthood. Such adults are not paedophiles but hebephiles.

To the best of my knowledge, no other animal species has such a prolonged development process as homo sapiens - it is due to the size of our brains. It is to our credit that (unlike in previous times and also in some other cultures) we regard the completion stages of early adulthood as worthy of special consideration and protection.
Title: Re: Paedophiles
Post by: Robbie on January 01, 2018, 05:20:53 PM
Good posts on this thread. LR, you need to return and respond as you started the thread.