Should pedophiles have rights?

[Lovelife090994]

Should pedophiles have rights? Does one choose to be one? What are your views on the matter as a whole?

My opinion:
Pedophiles legally have rights and they are human and also I am aware that many people are pedophiles yet have never, let me repeat that, never broke the law so maybe they deserve rights. But pedophilia is wrong and gross. So what do we do and where do we draw the line? I see pedophilia as a immoral and possibly as a mental condition worthy of either jail time or mental ward sentencing. I doubt any good can come of pedophilia.

In addition in the most monotone way possible---
And yes by pedophile I mean anyone attracted to people under the age of 18. And yes, I do think either separating pedophiles from children if not society would be a good thing.

[phuckphace]

pedophilia is a mental disorder, which is either in-born or the result of sexual abuse in childhood. so, while it obviously isn't a choice, it does need to be treated with zero tolerance.

Here's what I'd do ("child" is someone under the age of 16)

for cases involving possession and/or distribution of child pornography without evidence that the person has created the material and/or abused children - life in prison without parole (minimum security with some comfort)
creation of child pornography - defined as "taking photographs or video of minors engaging in sexual activity for the purpose of distribution with or without monetary gain" - death (would contain a clause that exempts sexting between minors)
child abuse/rape - death


in addition, I'd also proscribe death as a punishment for those who knowingly cover for pedophiles who are abusing children and/or creating child pornography. this is intended to target the "pedophile rings" that involve pedophiles covertly helping each other find victims and having each other's backs all the way through (so to speak).

rights you say? won't do you much good if you're dead :D

[TheN3rdyOutcast]

Of course they're people, but the worst thing one can possibly do is treat the pedophilia issue like the homosexuality issue, because they're two entirely different things.

[Lovelife090994]

pedophilia is a mental disorder, which is either in-born or the result of sexual abuse in childhood. so, while it obviously isn't a choice, it does need to be treated with zero tolerance.

Here's what I'd do ("child" is someone under the age of 16)

for cases involving possession and/or distribution of child pornography without evidence that the person has created the material and/or abused children - life in prison without parole (minimum security with some comfort)
creation of child pornography - defined as "taking photographs or video of minors engaging in sexual activity for the purpose of distribution with or without monetary gain" - death (would contain a clause that exempts sexting between minors)
child abuse/rape - death


in addition, I'd also proscribe death as a punishment for those who knowingly cover for pedophiles who are abusing children and/or creating child pornography. this is intended to target the "pedophile rings" that involve pedophiles covertly helping each other find victims and having each other's backs all the way through (so to speak).

rights you say? won't do you much good if you're dead :D

I agree on sentencing, not so much for life or for death but I see what you mean.

[phuckphace]

I agree on sentencing, not so much for life or for death but I see what you mean.

I did indeed pick the harshest punishments, but not out of paranoid "save the children" moral panic I can assure you. it's simply to assure that dangerous persons are permanently removed or separated from the rest of society to minimize the damage they can cause. I see this as a routine solution that should also apply to murderers, rapists and drug traffickers for example.

[Broken Toy]

Well i see it like this.

Its the same as schizophrenics in the way that they could be dangerous but its not their choice. Just because someone has a different more frowned upon disorder doesn't mean prison.
I think it should be treated as a mental disorder the first time they get caught then after the treatment ends if they get caught again then they face prison
then increase the sentence each time

[Gamma Male]

As a hard determinist, I don't blame anybody for anything ever. Nobody really has any say in anything. Pedophiles abuse children because they've been abused themselves or have an in born attraction, and because their impulse controls and/or empathy centers in the brain are weak. I look at acts of pedophilia the same way I look at all wrongdoings. We should do whatever we can to prevent future harm from occuring, but causing unnecessary harm to the pedophiles in an act of sadism, that doesn't prevent any future harm from occuring, is immoral.

I think the punishments we have now are good, but that we should have more preventive measures in place. A good start would be offering free anonymous therapy to pedophiles (who haven't abused children) to prevent them from acting on their urges. I think we need to realize that most of these people are very confused and fearful when they discover their urges for the first tine, and that most pedophiles go their whole lives without ever abusing children. We should treat it like a mental illness somewhat, but still punish those who act on their urges in order to send a message and maybe prevent some people from ever abusing children in the first place in the future.

[Lovelife090994]

As a hard determinist, I don't blame anybody for anything ever. Nobody really has any say in anything. Pedophiles abuse children because they've been abused themselves or have an in born attraction, and because their impulse controls and/or empathy centers in the brain are weak. I look at acts of pedophilia the same way I look at all wrongdoings. We should do whatever we can to prevent future harm from occuring, but causing unnecessary harm to the pedophiles in an act of sadism, that doesn't prevent any future harm from occuring, is immoral.

I think the punishments we have now are good, but that we should have more preventive measures in place. A good start would be offering free anonymous therapy to pedophiles (who haven't abused children) to prevent them from acting on their urges. I think we need to realize that most of these people are very confused and fearful when they discover their urges for the first tine, and that most pedophiles go their whole lives without ever abusing children. We should treat it like a mental illness somewhat, but still punish those who act on their urges in order to send a message and maybe prevent some people from ever abusing children in the first place in the future.

I actually agree with this since you did not say "we should boil all of them alive or put all in jail whether they raped someone or not." Maybe I'm too caring. I don't think ALL pedophiles should be jailed, but I don't like it either.

[thatcountrykid]

As a hard determinist, I don't blame anybody for anything ever. Nobody really has any say in anything. Pedophiles abuse children because they've been abused themselves or have an in born attraction, and because their impulse controls and/or empathy centers in the brain are weak. I look at acts of pedophilia the same way I look at all wrongdoings. We should do whatever we can to prevent future harm from occuring, but causing unnecessary harm to the pedophiles in an act of sadism, that doesn't prevent any future harm from occuring, is immoral.

I think the punishments we have now are good, but that we should have more preventive measures in place. A good start would be offering free anonymous therapy to pedophiles (who haven't abused children) to prevent them from acting on their urges. I think we need to realize that most of these people are very confused and fearful when they discover their urges for the first tine, and that most pedophiles go their whole lives without ever abusing children. We should treat it like a mental illness somewhat, but still punish those who act on their urges in order to send a message and maybe prevent some people from ever abusing children in the first place in the future.

Are you serious.

[Gamma Male]

Are you serious.

About what? The offering therapy to people dealing with unwanted sexual attraction?

EDIT: I'd like to expand on what I mean because that sounds bad. It's impossible to change your sexual attractions. By therapy I don't mean attempting to get rid of the unwanted feelings, but learning how to cope and deal with them and how to resist them. It would be great if we could cure pedophilia but from what I've researched attempting to cure pedophilia seems just as futile as attempting to "cure" homosexuality.

[Lovelife090994]

About what? The offering therapy to people dealing with unwanted sexual attraction?

EDIT: I'd like to expand on what I mean because that sounds bad. It's impossible to change your sexual attractions. By therapy I don't mean attempting to get rid of the unwanted feelings, but learning how to cope and deal with them and how to resist them. It would be great if we could cure pedophilia but from what I've researched attempting to cure pedophilia seems just as futile as attempting to "cure" homosexuality.

Won't people try and do this same thing to homosexuals world-wide?

[Gamma Male]

Won't people try and do this same thing to homosexuals world-wide?

What? I don't know.

What I meant was if someone is experiencing sexual feelings towards kids they deserve our sympathy and support, not hatred or disgust. Nobody chooses who they're attracted to and if someone is attracted to kids they need help learning how to control their urges, both for their sake and the sake of the children they come into contact with. We should offer free therapy and professional guidance to people who're struggling with these feelings as a preventive measure.

[Blood]

I'd just like to say that I think this poll is very very very limited by only allowing the user to choose one option; I could've honestly chosen three. Nonetheless it's your thread so do yo thang. Plus this is a very good topic to bring up. Agree with this for the most part:


What I meant was if someone is experiencing sexual feelings towards kids they deserve our sympathy and support, not hatred or disgust. Nobody chooses who they're attracted to and if someone is attracted to kids they need help learning how to control their urges, both for their sake and the sake of the children they come into contact with. We should offer free therapy and professional guidance to people who're struggling with these feelings as a preventive measure.

Also, pedophilia isn't a choice, and I don't necessarily agree that it's a mental disorder either. That's like saying that homosexuality is a mental disorder because "men aren't naturally meant to be with other men sexually." It's a sexual attraction, not a mental disorder. Grown people aren't "naturally meant" to be fucking and molesting children under 13. Do they do it because they have a mental disorder? No, they do it because they are sexually attracted to prepubescent children. Whether it's inborn or caused by abuse.

I have nothing against pedophilia, and I don't have a problem with pedophiles as long as they're not abusing children, which is the majority of them. As long as you're not causing unwanted harm, what turns you on and what gets you off is absolutely none of my business.

[Lovelife090994]

I'd just like to say that I think this poll is very very very limited by only allowing the user to choose one option; I could've honestly chosen three. Nonetheless it's your thread so do yo thang. Plus this is a very good topic to bring up. Agree with this for the most part:




Also, pedophilia isn't a choice, and I don't necessarily agree that it's a mental disorder either. That's like saying that homosexuality is a mental disorder because "men aren't naturally meant to be with other men." It's a sexual attraction, not a mental disorder. Grown people aren't "naturally meant" to be fucking and molesting children under 13. Do they do it because they have a mental disorder? No, they do it because they are sexually attracted to prepubescent children. Whether it's inborn or caused by abuse.

I have nothing against pedophilia, and I don't have a problem with pedophiles as long as they're not abusing children, which is the majority of them. As long as you're not causing unwanted harm, what turns you on and what gets you off is absolutely none of my business.

I wanted the poll to to multiselect but I can't change it.

[phuckphace]

there's no evidence that I'm aware of that indicates "most" or "almost all" pedophiles don't actually molest children, it's just a distinction without a difference for PR purposes. back in the day when homosexuals were battling for normalization we used to hear "most gay men don't have anal sex" and "most gay men just like to kiss and cuddle" in an attempt to direct public attention away from a behavior they considered disgusting. of course now that homosexuality has become mostly normalized, they've dropped the pretense in favor of "yes I often have unprotected anal sex with strangers I meet online, WHAT OF IT BIGOT?!" #TruvadaWhore

tl;dr - don't buy into the social liberal propaganda, especially not when it comes to something as serious as pedophilia. we're talking about people would willingly normalize any behavior if they could do so (and dammit they're trying).

[thatcountrykid]

About what? The offering therapy to people dealing with unwanted sexual attraction?

EDIT: I'd like to expand on what I mean because that sounds bad. It's impossible to change your sexual attractions. By therapy I don't mean attempting to get rid of the unwanted feelings, but learning how to cope and deal with them and how to resist them. It would be great if we could cure pedophilia but from what I've researched attempting to cure pedophilia seems just as futile as attempting to "cure" homosexuality.

I mean the part about how, oh we can't blame pedophiles because they were abused. Come on. And yes if they have urges they should be able to control. I feel the urge to beat the shit about some people and I will be blamed for it so why shouldn't they.

[Gamma Male]

I mean the part about how, oh we can't blame pedophiles because they were abused. Come on. And yes if they have urges they should be able to control. I feel the urge to beat the shit about some people and I will be blamed for it so why shouldn't they.

My reasoning wasn't specifically tailored to pedophiles, that's how I view morality as a whole. I'd be happy to explain my views on hard determinism and moral responsibility to you but I think that's kinda off topic for this thread.

[Bleid]

Pedophiles certainly deserve rights. They're perfectly fine.

Child rapists and child pornographers are the ones infringing on the welfare of children.

[Harry Smith]

the big issue for me is the fact that 17 year olds are getting arrested under child pornography laws for simply sending pictures to each others, like yeah I get people shouldn't do it but trying to get someone sent down for 20 years for sending another teen their junk seems a bit far

[Horatio Nelson]

Pedophiles are disgusting and should be burned at the stake. Any normal human being that deserves rights should be able to control those urges.

No offense intended, but if you actually think people who commit crimes can't control themselves, then you really have some backwards thinking.

[Broken Toy]

Pedophiles are disgusting and should be burned at the stake. I normal human being that deserves rights should be able to control those urges.

No offense intended, but if you actually think people who commit crimes can't control themselves, then you really have some backwards thinking.

Do you not have a type who you are attracted to. Its the sane for them but its an illness its natural for your choice of partner to mature ad you do, but they don't. Its not their fault for having a mental illness the same way its not the fault of someone with depression if they have depression. Im not saying its ok to be a paedophile but theyre victims too.

[Vlerchan]

It's a sexual attraction, not a mental disorder.
You'll find that what constitutes a mental disorder tends to be socially defined a lot of the time. It's society that defines what is and what isn't harmful, and from there what does and what doesn't infer a mental disorder. In the below I've bolded what is the most key sentence: it states that personality disorders can only exist within the context of a group - that group being society.

Personality, defined psychologically, is the set of enduring behavioral and mental traits that distinguish human beings. Hence, personality disorders are defined by experiences and behaviors that differ from societal norms and expectations. Those diagnosed with a personality disorder may experience difficulties in cognition, emotiveness, interpersonal functioning or control of impulses. In general, personality disorders are diagnosed in 40–60 percent of psychiatric patients, making them the most frequent of all psychiatric diagnoses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_disorder

For example, let's look at Histrionic personality disorder (HPD):

Histrionic personality disorder (HPD) is defined by the American Psychiatric Association as a personality disorder characterized by a pattern of excessive attention-seeking emotions, usually beginning in early adulthood, including inappropriately seductive behavior and an excessive need for approval. Histrionic people are lively, dramatic, vivacious, enthusiastic, and flirtatious. HPD affects four times as many women as men. It has a prevalence of 2–3% in the general population and 10–15% in inpatient and outpatient mental health institutions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histrionic_personality_disorder#Psychoanalytic_theory

People 'suffering' from HPD are seen as holding 'personality disorders' because society believes this to be true. What it is in reality is just people being above-average in the holding of certain traits that society deems harmful. As far as I'm aware someone developing HPD has nothing to do with their genes though I don't believe it doing so or not really impacts much on the point I'm making. Homosexuality was classified a mental disorder in the West up until the second-half of the 20th century. This had nothing to do with homosexuality being 'natural or unnatural' - what is 'natural' is also socially defined: I remember once reading a book (The Forever War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Forever_War)) in which heterosexuals were seen as 'unnatural' and were persecuted because the world government wanted to keep population down - but has to do with society-at-large simply disagreeing strongly enough with the traits exhibited by homosexuals, which were considered 'harmful'.

Paedophilia is a mental disorder because society-at-large considers it a mental disorder. And before you say "but only paedophiles acting on their urges are harmful", that can be said about a number of other personality disorder, with anti-social personality disorder (sociopathy) being the best example.

No offense intended, but if you actually think people who commit crimes can't control themselves, then you really have some backwards thinking.
I thought you believed that everything was preordained by a god?

[Blood]

You'll find that what constitutes a mental disorder tends to be socially defined a lot of the time. It's society that defines what is and what isn't harmful, and from there what does and what doesn't infer a mental disorder. In the below I've bolded what is the most key sentence: it states that personality disorders can only exist within the context of a group - that group being society.

Personality, defined psychologically, is the set of enduring behavioral and mental traits that distinguish human beings. Hence, personality disorders are defined by experiences and behaviors that differ from societal norms and expectations. Those diagnosed with a personality disorder may experience difficulties in cognition, emotiveness, interpersonal functioning or control of impulses. In general, personality disorders are diagnosed in 40–60 percent of psychiatric patients, making them the most frequent of all psychiatric diagnoses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_disorder

For example, let's look at Histrionic personality disorder (HPD):

Histrionic personality disorder (HPD) is defined by the American Psychiatric Association as a personality disorder characterized by a pattern of excessive attention-seeking emotions, usually beginning in early adulthood, including inappropriately seductive behavior and an excessive need for approval. Histrionic people are lively, dramatic, vivacious, enthusiastic, and flirtatious. HPD affects four times as many women as men. It has a prevalence of 2–3% in the general population and 10–15% in inpatient and outpatient mental health institutions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histrionic_personality_disorder#Psychoanalytic_theory

People 'suffering' from HPD are seen as holding 'personality disorders' because society believes this to be true. What it is in reality is just people being above-average in the holding of certain traits that society deems harmful. As far as I'm aware someone developing HPD has nothing to do with their genes though I don't believe it doing so or not really impacts much on the point I'm making. Homosexuality was classified a mental disorder in the West up until the second-half of the 20th century. This had nothing to do with homosexuality being 'natural or unnatural' - what is 'natural' is also socially defined: I remember once reading a book (The Forever War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Forever_War)) in which heterosexuals were seen as 'unnatural' and were persecuted because the world government wanted to keep population down - but has to do with society-at-large simply disagreeing strongly enough with the traits exhibited by homosexuals, which were considered 'harmful'.

Paedophilia is a mental disorder because society-at-large considers it a mental disorder. And before you say "but only paedophiles acting on their urges are harmful", that can be said about a number of other personality disorder, with anti-social personality disorder (sociopathy) being the best example.

Yes, I'm quite aware of what society defines it as, however this is one of those instances where I'm going to stick with my opinion.

[Gamma Male]

Pedophiles are disgusting and should be burned at the stake. Any normal human being that deserves rights should be able to control those urges.

No offense intended, but if you actually think people who commit crimes can't control themselves, then you really have some backwards thinking.

I don't think anybody can "control" themselves because we don't have free will. I don't believe in the philosophical concept of moral responsibility. We should still punish criminals, but only to prevent future wrongdoing.

[Lovelife090994]

Pedophiles are disgusting and should be burned at the stake. Any normal human being that deserves rights should be able to control those urges.

No offense intended, but if you actually think people who commit crimes can't control themselves, then you really have some backwards thinking.

I am shocked the amount of people responding how pedophiles can be rationalized. I don't see pedophilia as deserving much mercy. Child rapists are pedophiles. True, not all pedophiles rape but it leads to it.

I don't think anybody can "control" themselves because we don't have free will. I don't believe in the philosophical concept of moral responsibility. We should still punish criminals, but only to prevent future wrongdoing.

We're not animals Gamma. If one can't control urges of any type then there is a problem. By that logic a rapist is justified because the rapist can't control their urges as humans.

[Gamma Male]

We're not animals Gamma. If one can't control urges of any type then there is a problem. By that logic a rapist is justified because the rapist can't control their urges as humans.

Actually, humans are animals. :3

I'm not going to try to justify or explain my beliefs to you because that would take to long, but I do not believe in free will. I do not believe anyone is truly responsible for their actions because who we are and what we do is determined purely a massive chain of cause and effect which we have no control over.

It is for this reason I believe punishment is only ever justifiable if the pain that is prevented in the future is greater than the pain of the punishment itself. The pain caused to pedophiles by being imprisoned is bad, but the pain that would've occurred to children otherwise is greater, making imprisonment morally justifiable.

But as I've said before, I have lots of sympathy for people who have to deal with attraction to children and for the potential child victims, which is why I think we should take every preventive measure possible to ensure pedophiles don't act on their urges, including offering them guidance and council and not shaming them or looking down on them for feelings beyond their control.

[Broken Toy]

Actually, humans are animals. :3


But as I've said before, I have lots of sympathy for people who have to deal with attraction to children and for the potential child victims, which is why I think we should take every preventive measure possible to ensure pedophiles don't act on their urges, including offering them guidance and council and not shaming them or looking down on them for feelings beyond their control.

I think no one who has been against having some sort of sympathy for paedophiles has actually acknowledged the point we both made about how its an attraction. They just bypass it like its not the basis of the thread.

I think that its kind of interesting how they think attraction to children IS a choice, but attraction to men from men (or women from women, just an example here) or being gay, ISNT a choice. Surely its the same thing.
Both not common so what's the difference

[Neverender]

First of all, that poll is absolutely terrible in terms of it's answers. The answers are all very extreme, so I won't vote.

Anyways, based on the Title of the thread, "Should Pedophiles have rights?", well yes they should have rights. The same rights as every other Canadian (I won't say American until Gay marriage bigots die in the other 26 or so states).

If you mean "Should they have rights to children", then absolutely not. That's an absurd proclaimation often claimed by anti-gay rights activists as an excuse to keep Gays unmarried or Homosexuality illegal, depending on the circumstance

Of course, what is missed in the Poll and the Question stated in the title is, what about Pedophiles who do not act upon their urges. Those are innocent people left in a dire emotional situation by their biological wants, which are usually irrational.

Put it this way, there are few greater harms than if you harm a child, except maybe genocide where you harm many children, like Serbia in the Yugoslav wars.
But if those people are fighting those urges I won't, and I can not condemn those people in a lump sum of all Pedophiles. They're having a tough-enough time as it is and I won't exacerbate their isolation.

Furthermore, I'm unclear of the OP's definition of Pedophiles, as they aren't one general group. Does the OP mean to include Hebephiles and Ephebephiles along with pure Pedophiles as well? For those unclear of the definition, Hebephile is the desire for children who are early pubescent, and show signs of adulthood (around ages 11-15 or so), Ephebephiles like ages 15-19 or so, and also enjoy Adult aspects of the human body, so neither are considered true Pedophiles although they are lumped in with them. It should be noted that if someone is aged 19 and are dating or fucking another who is ages 17, that doesn't qualify them for any because the ages are just too close.

[Lovelife090994]

First of all, that poll is absolutely terrible in terms of it's answers. The answers are all very extreme, so I won't vote.

Anyways, based on the Title of the thread, "Should Pedophiles have rights?", well yes they should have rights. The same rights as every other Canadian (I won't say American until Gay marriage bigots die in the other 26 or so states).

If you mean "Should they have rights to children", then absolutely not. That's an absurd proclaimation often claimed by anti-gay rights activists as an excuse to keep Gays unmarried or Homosexuality illegal, depending on the circumstance

Of course, what is missed in the Poll and the Question stated in the title is, what about Pedophiles who do not act upon their urges. Those are innocent people left in a dire emotional situation by their biological wants, which are usually irrational.

Put it this way, there are few greater harms than if you harm a child, except maybe genocide where you harm many children, like Serbia in the Yugoslav wars.
But if those people are fighting those urges I won't, and I can not condemn those people in a lump sum of all Pedophiles. They're having a tough-enough time as it is and I won't exacerbate their isolation.

Furthermore, I'm unclear of the OP's definition of Pedophiles, as they aren't one general group. Does the OP mean to include Hebephiles and Ephebephiles along with pure Pedophiles as well? For those unclear of the definition, Hebephile is the desire for children who are early pubescent, and show signs of adulthood (around ages 11-15 or so), Ephebephiles like ages 15-19 or so, and also enjoy Adult aspects of the human body, so neither are considered true Pedophiles although they are lumped in with them. It should be noted that if someone is aged 19 and are dating or fucking another who is ages 17, that doesn't qualify them for any because the ages are just too close.

I hope you realize hoping people die just for having different views is equally extreme. I'm talking about anyone sexually attracted by someone under 18.

[Neverender]

I hope you realize hoping people die just for having different views is equally extreme. I'm talking about anyone sexually attracted by someone under 18.

Anyone sexually attracted to someone under 18? Well I think it's perfectly acceptable for partners to be 17 and 18, 17 and 19, that area. They aren't pedophiles or really ephebephiles because they're attracted to the same age-area. Even though legally some cases may say the opposite.

There are also a number of different views I would have depending on each individual case. Now obvious pedophilia or Hebephilia by anyone who is an adult is widely considered to be wrong. Anything against another's will is wrong. Taking advantage of someone by virtue of their age is wrong. (I'm using wrong here in both ethical and legal sense, although Ethics is subjective)

I think it's fine if someone tells a councillor or a psychologist that they have these thoughts. They haven't acted on them, they've harmed no one, and they're letting others know. They aren't keeping it bottled inside to cynically mull over it.

Other areas I would be too lengthy in word to express and keep attention.

I'm not a cruel person who slaps all people under a wide psychological terms in black or white, I'm not Javert of Hugo's Les Miserables, I am not the legal or moral law at it's most heartless.

[Blood]

First of all, that poll is absolutely terrible in terms of it's answers. The answers are all very extreme, so I won't vote.

Anyways, based on the Title of the thread, "Should Pedophiles have rights?", well yes they should have rights. The same rights as every other Canadian (I won't say American until Gay marriage bigots die in the other 26 or so states).

If you mean "Should they have rights to children", then absolutely not. That's an absurd proclaimation often claimed by anti-gay rights activists as an excuse to keep Gays unmarried or Homosexuality illegal, depending on the circumstance

Of course, what is missed in the Poll and the Question stated in the title is, what about Pedophiles who do not act upon their urges. Those are innocent people left in a dire emotional situation by their biological wants, which are usually irrational.

Put it this way, there are few greater harms than if you harm a child, except maybe genocide where you harm many children, like Serbia in the Yugoslav wars.
But if those people are fighting those urges I won't, and I can not condemn those people in a lump sum of all Pedophiles. They're having a tough-enough time as it is and I won't exacerbate their isolation.

Furthermore, I'm unclear of the OP's definition of Pedophiles, as they aren't one general group. Does the OP mean to include Hebephiles and Ephebephiles along with pure Pedophiles as well? For those unclear of the definition, Hebephile is the desire for children who are early pubescent, and show signs of adulthood (around ages 11-15 or so), Ephebephiles like ages 15-19 or so, and also enjoy Adult aspects of the human body, so neither are considered true Pedophiles although they are lumped in with them. It should be noted that if someone is aged 19 and are dating or fucking another who is ages 17, that doesn't qualify them for any because the ages are just too close.

Oh don't forget nepiophilia (ages 0-3) because who doesn't love a nice tender baby every once in a while.

[Lovelife090994]

Anyone sexually attracted to someone under 18? Well I think it's perfectly acceptable for partners to be 17 and 18, 17 and 19, that area. They aren't pedophiles or really ephebephiles because they're attracted to the same age-area. Even though legally some cases may say the opposite.

There are also a number of different views I would have depending on each individual case. Now obvious pedophilia or Hebephilia by anyone who is an adult is widely considered to be wrong. Anything against another's will is wrong. Taking advantage of someone by virtue of their age is wrong. (I'm using wrong here in both ethical and legal sense, although Ethics is subjective)

I think it's fine if someone tells a councillor or a psychologist that they have these thoughts. They haven't acted on them, they've harmed no one, and they're letting others know. They aren't keeping it bottled inside to cynically mull over it.

Other areas I would be too lengthy in word to express and keep attention.

I'm not a cruel person who slaps all people under a wide psychological terms in black or white, I'm not Javert of Hugo's Les Miserables, I am not the legal or moral law at it's most heartless.

I'm talking about adults, adults wanting sex with minors. That's not right.

[Typhlosion]

I don't see a problem with paedophiles having rights. Because they have a peculiar sexual attraction, often involuntarily, means that they are no longer human beings? As long as they don't act upon it, they should continue having full rights.

I'm talking about adults, adults wanting sex with minors. That's not right.

They're right - you'll have to be a lot more specific than that. The concept of being an "adult" is just some term in law that means anyone over eighteen; we can't both talk about morals and law at the same time. A person 17 y/o mayn't have sex with a person perhaps one month older than them as well as 18? To avoid using legal terms here, what would you define as an adult?

I have few problems with sex between people that can legally consent - or better phrased - between people that are sexually mature.

[Neverender]

I don't see a problem with paedophiles having rights. Because they have a peculiar sexual attraction, often involuntarily, means that they are no longer human beings? As long as they don't act upon it, they should continue having full rights.



They're right - you'll have to be a lot more specific than that. The concept of being an "adult" is just some term in law that means anyone over eighteen; we can't both talk about morals and law at the same time. A person 17 y/o mayn't have sex with a person perhaps one month older than them as well as 18? To avoid using legal terms here, what would you define as an adult?

I have few problems with sex between people that can legally consent - or better phrased - between people that are sexually mature.

Thank you for seeing a slightly wider angle of things.

People seem to think Adult vs Youth is a concrete concept. It isn't. Legally, it's defined. In reality it's really vague, although people are quick to ignore my thoughts that it is obvious that crimes against children is inherently wrong when they can nitpick.

[Ben_Frost]

I think that any convicted felon shouldn't have rights. None whatsoever. So I think that a convicted child rapist, child porn producer and distributer and anything related and being convicted should not have rights.

[Lovelife090994]

I don't see a problem with paedophiles having rights. Because they have a peculiar sexual attraction, often involuntarily, means that they are no longer human beings? As long as they don't act upon it, they should continue having full rights.



They're right - you'll have to be a lot more specific than that. The concept of being an "adult" is just some term in law that means anyone over eighteen; we can't both talk about morals and law at the same time. A person 17 y/o mayn't have sex with a person perhaps one month older than them as well as 18? To avoid using legal terms here, what would you define as an adult?

I have few problems with sex between people that can legally consent - or better phrased - between people that are sexually mature.

Why would and 18 year old sleep with a 17 year old? Honestly even if children can be sexual that doesn't mean children and adults should start sleeping with each other.

[Harry Smith]

Why would and 18 year old sleep with a 17 year old? Honestly even if children can be sexual that doesn't mean children and adults should start sleeping with each other.

I've slept with an 18 year old, there was only a 4 month gap between it. What's the issue with that-they were hardly an adult

[Lovelife090994]

I've slept with an 18 year old, there was only a 4 month gap between it. What's the issue with that-they were hardly an adult

If people knew about that affair here he/she'd be in prison.

[Harry Smith]

If people knew about that affair here he/she'd be in prison.

well they wouldn't here because the age of the consent is 16-which is what it should be in the US.

What's the difference between a 17 year old the night before their 18th and an 18 year old on their birthday?

[Lovelife090994]

well they wouldn't here because the age of the consent is 16-which is what it should be in the US.

What's the difference between a 17 year old the night before their 18th and an 18 year old on their birthday?

It's not about the person's parts. Boys and girls, teens, and adults all have either a penis or a labia, but I'm talking about age. With consent yes, but I'm talking about the 18 yr old+ who's wanting to sleep with someone under 18 and even worse if they want someone under 16. I admit, some teens are attractive, some girls and boys are very developed and could fool you, but consent or not--Why would I sleep with someone who is a minor when I'm a legal adult? Seems a bit detestable if not worrisome, don't you think?

[Harry Smith]

I'm talking about the 18 yr old+ who's wanting to sleep with someone under 18 and even worse if they want someone under 16. I admit, some teens are attractive, some girls and boys are very developed and could fool you, but consent or not--Why would I sleep with someone who is a minor when I'm a legal adult? Seems a bit detestable if not worrisome, don't you think?

It's really not that much of an issue in individual cases, if I meet someone who is 16/17 if I get on with them and if they got on with me why shouldn't it go any further as long as they consent-I don't see it as detestable or worrisome

[Lovelife090994]

It's really not that much of an issue in individual cases, if I meet someone who is 16/17 if I get on with them and if they got on with me why shouldn't it go any further as long as they consent-I don't see it as detestable or worrisome

Sex is rarely a one-time thing.

[Harry Smith]

Sex is rarely a one-time thing.

I'd disagree very strongly

[Lovelife090994]

I'd disagree very strongly

Oh really? Are you sexual right now? Or single? I have an excuse. I'm still a virgin and in no way attracted to young teens. Teens 18+ yes. If I see a cute person under 18 I admire but delete them from memory.

[Harry Smith]

Oh really? Are you sexual right now? Or single? I have an excuse. I'm still a virgin and in no way attracted to young teens. Teens 18+ yes. If I see a cute person under 18 I admire but delete them from memory.

aha I am single and I am sexual, without going into the backstory a guy I very much like is 7 months younger than me-at some stage I'm going to be 18-he's going to be 17 and I dont' see why it would be an issue if we hooked up, we're in the same year, we both drink and we're both responsible

[Lovelife090994]

aha I am single and I am sexual, without going into the backstory a guy I very much like is 7 months younger than me-at some stage I'm going to be 18-he's going to be 17 and I dont' see why it would be an issue if we hooked up, we're in the same year, we both drink and we're both responsible

You can drink at 18? And you can sleep with whoever you want, just not minors.

[Vlerchan]

I have no idea why you're placing so much importance on the socially-constructed legal distinction between adult and child.

[Dennis98]

Yes , they should only have right to choose which type of capital punishment they would like ...

[Stronk Serb]

Yes , they should only have right to choose which type of capital punishment they would like ...

But what if they didn't molest anyone? What if they are controlling their urges. I wluld just bar them the right to adopt children and work with children, like a school or kindergarten. If they did molest children, just send 'em to prison with the worst murderers, robbers and thieves. Pedophiles there, aside from punishment by law get punishment by inmates.

[Dennis98]

But what if they didn't molest anyone? What if they are controlling their urges. I wluld just bar them the right to adopt children and work with children, like a school or kindergarten. If they did molest children, just send 'em to prison with the worst murderers, robbers and thieves. Pedophiles there, aside from punishment by law get punishment by inmates.

In every case , they are dangerous for normal and healthy society in every country .. You never know when can they show in their real sick shape .. If you want all answers for pedophiles then buy book named "Armagedon" by Vlada Arsić . That are real based stories that are happening in Serbia , when some "friendly" old man can "control his urges" - as you said ( I still dont understand how can you call urge to have sexual intercourse with innocent child ? ) , but one day he couldnt "control" so he raped his neighbor girl , and many other examples ...

[Stronk Serb]

You can drink at 18? And you can sleep with whoever you want, just not minors.

I'm sorry, but Jesus's step-father, Joseph, (by da Bible) took the Virgin Mary when she was like 15. It wouldn't surprise me if Jesus was his child. Also Muhammed took a 9 year-old girl for wife. If you say those are comparable to a 18 year old having sex with a soon-to-be 18 year old, then you have a problem because in the last case, the older one isn't old enough to be a grandparent to the younger one.

[Vlerchan]

@Deasus98: Everyone is a potential rapist.

In my opinion it's a bad idea to pre-emptively execute everyone though.

[Dennis98]

@Deasus98: Everyone is a potential rapist.

In my opinion it's a bad idea to pre-emptively execute everyone though.

Dont say it "everyone" , because if you or someone close to you are fu**ing attracted to innocent children , then I am not and I will not be as long as I live ..

[Stronk Serb]

Most of them were born that way. Like homosexuals. Pedophiles at least deserve help like psychological or psychiatric therapy to help supress their desires so they
can live normally. Just like psycopaths and schyzophrenics have therapy.

[Dennis98]

@Broken Toy

Look kid , pedophilia is not illness , you cant help psychopaths they will just ignore it , but psychopacy is changed condition of psyche , but , you cant help pedophiles , because they are not even disordered or ill , they are just "a la cream" of evil ... When some schizophrenics do something wrong , you can help him/her , because they are not conscience of their acts , usually shizophreniacs are dangerous only for themselfs, it is way different in pedophilia , because they are conscience what did they done , and usually they are satisfying on though of their crimes , and that is thing that makes them dangerous , they are conscience and they dont even think that it is bad , instead of that , they are masturbating and satisfying on their sick though ...

[Typhlosion]

Let's please not stray from the topic "should pedophiles have rights", and not attack people verbally or try convert each other.

[Lovelife090994]

I'm sorry, but Jesus's step-father, Joseph, (by da Bible) took the Virgin Mary when she was like 15. It wouldn't surprise me if Jesus was his child. Also Muhammed took a 9 year-old girl for wife. If you say those are comparable to a 18 year old having sex with a soon-to-be 18 year old, then you have a problem because in the last case, the older one isn't old enough to be a grandparent to the younger one.

Bear in mind how in those days people barely saw the age the of 30 let alone 20. However marriage to a 9 year old still probably was frowned on. It wasn't until recently in the Western world that girls at child bearing age were no longer allowed to marry. 16 to some is old enough to marry. I disagree. Besides, just because Mary was 15 doesn't mean she would have lived long. Back then if you weren't married by 15t then you probably weren't going to ever marry.

[Stronk Serb]

Bear in mind how in those days people barely saw the age the of 30 let alone 20. However marriage to a 9 year old still probably was frowned on. It wasn't until recently in the Western world that girls at child bearing age were no longer allowed to marry. 16 to some is old enough to marry. I disagree. Besides, just because Mary was 15 doesn't mean she would have lived long. Back then if you weren't married by 15t then you probably weren't going to ever marry.

Just because it was acceptable back then doesn't mean it was right. The average homeless person lived up to 30, but the top of the lower class and the upper class lived 'till their fifties.

[Paladino]

I have seen around that it is a mental illness, that it is a sexuality the same way homosexual/hetrosexual is a sexuality.

I believe that as long as they don't physically do anything, and they definitely don't want to be that way then they should be left alone. I also believe that they shouldn't tell anyone about it other than a counsellor, because even though they aren't acting on their feelings, people would still want to hurt them. Sex with children is wrong, and as long as they know this and dont do it and live a normal life then they should have the same rights as we do, if it is an illness.

[Remora]

You're into socks, that's fine, wear socks, but keep your hands off mine.
You're into feet, that's fine, smell feet, but keep your hands off mine.
You're into briefs, that's fine, use briefs, but keep your hands off mine.
You're into kids, that's fine, look at kids, but keep your hands off mine.

in my opinion, it's "just a fetish", now don't hit me please. i'm fine with it as long as they keep it to themselves. this might just be hormones, but honestly, even though i can't be a pedophile according to law i probably am one anyways.

[Jean Poutine]

Obviously pedophiles should have rights. Last I checked, they're human beings. Because with rights come responsibilities, it wouldn't feel right to strip a whole class of people of their rights then expect them to follow the rules. Besides how would it work? How does the government decide who is a pedo without a child abuse crime conviction?

Erotic outlets where no child is harmed but depicting children (artistic drawings, hentai, literature, etc) should be 100% legal. Law has no business deciding what is or isn't morally acceptable. Maybe pedophiles wouldn't fondle children as much if they could fondle themselves looking at nude kids that were drawn.

[Miserabilia]

I want to vote for both "it's not a choice", "it's not always bad" and perhaps "it;s a mental disorder".

I definetly do not think it's a choice. Like sexual preference and fetish, it's something you have. It may have a cause in your life, or you may be born with it. Who knows? Either way it's not a choice.

Furthermore it's not always bad. There's no problem as long as no children are harmed or actualy engage in relationships and sexual acts with adults.

The main difference between human sexualities (gay straight bi etc.) and pedophilia, is that a sexuality implies sexual attraction between people.
Pre pubescent children are however not capable of (*adult!*) sexual and romantical attraction.

At what age they are is questionable, which explains different ages of consent in different era's and areas.


Erotic outlets where no child is harmed but depicting children (artistic drawings, hentai, literature, etc) should be 100% legal. Law has no business deciding what is or isn't morally acceptable. Maybe pedophiles wouldn't fondle children as much if they could fondle themselves looking at nude kids that were drawn.

Fully aggree with this.
Just like any sexual fantasy, or any other fantasy, people should be free to epress it and others should be free to view it.
No matter how messed up it is!
I understand that people feel disguisted by art depecting pedophilia, but there is also (POPULAR!) art depecting rape, murder and torture! Think about movies!
It's okay as long as it's fictional.

[Lovelife090994]

I want to vote for both "it's not a choice", "it's not always bad" and perhaps "it;s a mental disorder".

I definetly do not think it's a choice. Like sexual preference and fetish, it's something you have. It may have a cause in your life, or you may be born with it. Who knows? Either way it's not a choice.

Furthermore it's not always bad. There's no problem as long as no children are harmed or actualy engage in relationships and sexual acts with adults.

The main difference between human sexualities (gay straight bi etc.) and pedophilia, is that a sexuality implies sexual attraction between people.
Pre pubescent children are however not capable of (*adult!*) sexual and romantical attraction.

At what age they are is questionable, which explains different ages of consent in different era's and areas.



Fully aggree with this.
Just like any sexual fantasy, or any other fantasy, people should be free to epress it and others should be free to view it.
No matter how messed up it is!
I understand that people feel disguisted by art depecting pedophilia, but there is also (POPULAR!) art depecting rape, murder and torture! Think about movies!
It's okay as long as it's fictional.

Personally I think pedophilia is a mental condition as are some fetishes, but unlike you I do think some of it comes down to choice. A lot of pedophiles are nothing more than sick aroused bastards who like looking at little girls and boys change clothes.

[Pulp501]

To me, pedophilia is not wrong, people can't help how they feel. Now, molesting children is horrible, and immoral and disgusting. Being a pedophile isn't the same as being a child molester. That's the difference between homosexual relationships and pedophiles. Homosexuals are two consenting adults. Kids can't make the decision to consent, but someone being attracted to kids isn't a bad thing if they don't act on it. I also believe that sometimes they can "get over it" and try to learn to become attracted to other people their own age.

[DeadEyes]

When you abuse children, you should in fact have one right, and one right only: the right to die.

[Lovelife090994]

When you abuse children, you should in fact have one right, and one right only: the right to die.

Agreed.

[Miserabilia]

When you abuse children, you should in fact have one right, and one right only: the right to die.

Agreed.

There is a different between being a pedophile and being a molester of children.
Alot of pedophiles are normally funcionting people in society, not engaging in sexual acts with minors but repressing their urges.
There are also necrophiles that would enjoy nothing more than digging out a corpse and having a way with it, but that doesn't mean they actualy do it.
I aggree that sexualy abusing children is a horrible disgusting act.
But this does not equal pedophila.
Just like being into rough sex doesn't make a man a rapist, etc.

[Lovelife090994]

There is a different between being a pedophile and being a molester of children.
Alot of pedophiles are normally funcionting people in society, not engaging in sexual acts with minors but repressing their urges.
There are also necrophiles that would enjoy nothing more than digging out a corpse and having a way with it, but that doesn't mean they actualy do it.
I aggree that sexualy abusing children is a horrible disgusting act.
But this does not equal pedophila.
Just like being into rough sex doesn't make a man a rapist, etc.

You said earlier you didn't believe man had the will or freedom to repress or suppress, that suppressing urges are unnatural and that we are victims of our bodies. Like we have no free will. Changed your mind?

[Alexwellace]

I've read some distressing things on this thread, ranging from people saying they should have no rights to one sicko saying Pedophiles should be burnt at the stake.If it's a crime as defined by the law, such as having a sexual relationship with a child not of a concenting age, then it will be punished, and punished according to the law and Human Rights. But death? What kind of sicko thinks *they* have the right to strip another human of the right to live because of their actions that *they* deem wrong. Of course, these actions are wrong, but they may not be in the mind of the person committing the crime, which means these people have to punished for there actions as we try to make them understand why what they did was wrong.

On the same issue, as long as no child is engaged in it, any adult has the right to indulge their fantasies via art or anime as long as no child is in any way harmed. Is it your intention to condemn people to death for how they are born even if they haven't committed any crimes?

[Miserabilia]

You said earlier you didn't believe man had the will or freedom to repress or suppress, that suppressing urges are unnatural and that we are victims of our bodies. Like we have no free will. Changed your mind?

With earlier you mean this thread or???
Not really sure what part of my post you mean, could you quote it?

[Lovelife090994]

With earlier you mean this thread or???
Not really sure what part of my post you mean, could you quote it?

Earlier when you've talked to me.

[Miserabilia]

Earlier when you've talked to me.

Well gee.
Anyway, I didn't say people should always follow their urges and not doing so is unnatural. I never said that. Think I did? Please quote and help make this thing a little easier.
Back on topic,
I also don't think people with a murder fetish should murder people. And yes that exists. etc etc.

[Lovelife090994]

Well gee.
Anyway, I didn't say people should always follow their urges and not doing so is unnatural. I never said that. Think I did? Please quote and help make this thing a little easier.
Back on topic,
I also don't think people with a murder fetish should murder people. And yes that exists. etc etc.

Ok good. I don't support pedophilia or murder.

[lovelycaleb]

I say no. If youre such a lowlife member of society that you rape a little kid, you deserve nothing. Absolutely fucking NOTHING.

[Gamma Male]

I say no. If youre such a lowlife member of society that you rape a little kid, you deserve nothing. Absolutely fucking NOTHING.

What do you propose should happen to people who are attracted to children but haven't actually had or attempted to have sexual contact with one?

[lovelycaleb]

I don't care how they feel about kids, i care how they act towards kids.

[RRay99]

It's a hard one. I think pedophiles need therapy to make sure they don't do things that are bad, but are not evil automatically. What people are turned on by is hard wired I think. People don't choose what they like sexually.

[Arkansasguy]

Should pedophiles have rights? Does one choose to be one? What are your views on the matter as a whole?

My opinion:
Pedophiles legally have rights and they are human and also I am aware that many people are pedophiles yet have never, let me repeat that, never broke the law so maybe they deserve rights. But pedophilia is wrong and gross. So what do we do and where do we draw the line? I see pedophilia as a immoral and possibly as a mental condition worthy of either jail time or mental ward sentencing. I doubt any good can come of pedophilia.

In addition in the most monotone way possible---
And yes by pedophile I mean anyone attracted to people under the age of 18. And yes, I do think either separating pedophiles from children if not society would be a good thing.

My opinion on this is the same as on homosexuality. If they act on their impulses they should be punished. If not they should not be, although there are wisely some activities which they should be excluded from.

[Atom]

What kind of question is this? Of course they should have rights! Just as much rights as you and any other human being.

Here are some facts and what I think of the topic:

People who often judge pedophiles have no idea about the subject. Some even think that people are sick for making out with a 17 year old. Let me remind you that 16 is the age of consent in the most countries of the world. It's 15 in Greece, France and Denmark. And 14 in Germany, Italy and Portugal. Until recently, Spain had one of the lowest ages of consent - 13.
In Saudi Arabia there are no age boundaries on marriage and it's perfectly normal to see a man marrying a 12-year-old girl.

One research shows that at least 20% of male population have sexual feelings towards children, the other research shows even bigger numbers, as high as 30%. And you suggest that we should hate and strip off all rights 1/5 (or even 1/3) of the male population?
Pedophilia, just like homosexuality, is present in vast amount of animal species.

But what about children, you might ask? "They get traumatized and scarred for life."
Well, research says no, that is not the case in the majority of instances. 13 from 15 interviewed children, that had a consensual relationship with an adult, said that they were happy in this relationship and no harm was done to them.

And what about non-consensual cases? Are all pedophiles rapists?
The answer is simple - there are just as many pedophiles who are rapists as there are rapists who are not pedophiles (percentage wise).

[Typhlosion]

One research shows that at least 20% of male population have sexual feelings towards children, the other research shows even bigger numbers, as high as 30%. And you suggest that we should hate and strip off all rights 1/5 (or even 1/3) of the male population?
Pedophilia, just like homosexuality, is present in vast amount of animal species.

But what about children, you might ask? "They get traumatized and scarred for life."
Well, research says no, that is not the case in the majority of instances. 13 from 15 interviewed children, that had a consensual relationship with an adult, said that they were happy in this relationship and no harm was done to them.

And what about non-consensual cases? Are all pedophiles rapists?
The answer is simple - there are just as many pedophiles who are rapists as there are rapists who are not pedophiles (percentage wise).

I would love to know the sources for those three claims. Do you have them?

[TheLoneWolf]

I haven't read everything that has been said here, but I do want to point out a major difference.
There's a BIG difference between a pedophile and a pedo-sexual!

In my opinion being a pedophile is not a choice. You're simply born with it. Same as some people are born with being gay, bi, transgender or whatever.
Whether you want to act on these feelings is a CHOICE. Same as you cannot help having feelings for the same sex. But there is however a choice wether you want to act on them.
And of course, I would never approve of an adult having sex with a child. But they simply cannot help these feelings.

So yes, pedophiles in my opinion should have rights. They should be helped not to act on these feelings. Becase it is wrong and most of them probably know that.

Pedo-sexuals on the other hand, should be locked in prison for the rest of their lives.

[SethfromMI]

I haven't read everything that has been said here, but I do want to point out a major difference.
There's a BIG difference between a pedophile and a pedo-sexual!

In my opinion being a pedophile is not a choice. You're simply born with it. Same as some people are born with being gay, bi, transgender or whatever.
Whether you want to act on these feelings is a CHOICE. Same as you cannot help having feelings for the same sex. But there is however a choice wether you want to act on them.
And of course, I would never approve of an adult having sex with a child. But they simply cannot help these feelings.

So yes, pedophiles in my opinion should have rights. They should be helped not to act on these feelings. Becase it is wrong and most of them probably know that.

Pedo-sexuals on the other hand, should be locked in prison for the rest of their lives.

I was about to say there is a huge difference between having feelings and acting upon them

[TheLoneWolf]

I think this one is suitable in this thread:
http://www.upworthy.com/this-19-year-old-pedophile-has-never-gone-near-a-child-and-he-needs-you-to-hear-his-story

[Atom]

In my opinion being a pedophile is not a choice.
You're absolutely right and even the American Psychological Association's DSM-5 agrees with you. It describes pedophilia as a sexual orientation that does not necessarily constitute a disorder.

I would love to know the sources for those three claims. Do you have them?
I'm not sure if I'm allowed to quote so I'll just point to the source. If you don't want to read the whole thing just give me a go ahead and I'll quote.
One research shows that at least 20% of male population have sexual feelings towards children, the other research shows even bigger numbers, as high as 30%.
"Sexual Arousal and Arousability to Pedophilic Stimuli in a Community Sample of Normal Men." (1995)
"Is pedophilia a mental disorder?" by Richard Green.
Pedophilia, just like homosexuality, is present in vast amount of animal species.
There a lot of sources. I would suggest googling it yourself, but here is one, for example: "Biological Exuberance - Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity" by Bruce Bagemihl.
But what about children, you might ask? "They get traumatized and scarred for life."
Well, research says no, that is not the case in the majority of instances. 13 from 15 interviewed children, that had a consensual relationship with an adult, said that they were happy in this relationship and no harm was done to them.
Sorry, I mixed my numbers a little bit. "Boys on Their Contacts with Men" by Theo Sandfort.
And what about non-consensual cases? Are all pedophiles rapists?
The answer is simple - there are just as many pedophiles who are rapists as there are rapists who are not pedophiles (percentage wise).
Common sence and pure logic.

[Human]

I don't think people who are paedophiles necessarily choose that they're a paedophile, as long as they don't act on their urges they should have just as many rights as everyone else

[Sir Enigma]

Oh my god... I see that people are still let on the wrong path when it comes to pedobears...
Alright, lets waste 5 more minutes of my short life trying to convince people on the internet that they are wrong.
Alright, lets begin.

I voted that its not always bad. I mean it. A 18 year old loving a 16 year old is a pedophile. If they love eachother, who the fuck cares? The 16 year old partner is by law responsible for their own actions from 13 years upwards.
Also, I met a lot of women and men who are 25 or 30+ and they are in a relationship with a 16/17 year old. If its a healthy relationship, most age diffrences dont matter because they both consented to the relationship.
If one of the partners didnt consent, well its not really pedophilia anymore :)

But anyways, non-teen (children) pedophilia is bad, i agree. But teen pedophilia usually isnt because if you cant think straight when youre 14, 15, there isnt much time to become smart before youre 18. I mean im not an adult and I exchanged pics with an adult. Is that adult a pedobear? No. we both consented and we enjoyed eachother. It wasnt purely sexual, we were good friends as well.
You gotta live through something to understand it. :)
Happy arguing with strangers over topics that are purely a fabrication of someones subjective conscience. :)

[phuckphace]

You're absolutely right and even the American Psychological Association's DSM-5 agrees with you. It describes pedophilia as a sexual orientation that does not necessarily constitute a disorder.

appeal to authority. the DSM can be (and is) periodically revised according to the political climate of the time. you are aware that homosexuality was once declared to be a mental disorder in your "scientific" DSM, right? academia in general is a political machine and nothing more.

also, mathematics is "pure logic". your opinions (which is all they are) are informed by other fallible humans with biases. pseudo-intellectuals have a bad habit of confusing human logic with hard logic.

[Abhorrence]

I personally think paedophilia is just disgusting. I don't condone it at all and if someone has thoughts similar to it they need to seek professional help.

[Vlerchan]

The hypothesis that sexual arousal to pedophilic stimuli is a function of general sexual arousability factors was supported by the positive correlation of pedophilic with adult heterosexual arousal, particularly in the physiological data. Subjects who were highly arousable, insofar as they were unable to voluntarily and completely inhibit their sexual arousal, were more sexually aroused by all stimuli than were subjects who were unable to inhibit their sexual arousal.

Hall et al., 'Sexual Arousal and Arousability to Pedophilic Stimuli in a Community Sample of Normal Men', Behaviour Therapy 26.4 (1995) 690

In other words people who are easily aroused by sexual material in general can't helped but be aroused by paedophilic material (frontal nudes of young girls).

It's also notable that paedophilia is defined as having an exclusive sexual attraction to children. All men but one in this study reported being sexually attracted to adult woman and all men reported having had sexual relations with at least one woman. So even if we pretend the results are significant it doesn't make a quarter of the population paedophiles by standard definition.