Homosexualism Exposed

But I'm not one of them squire - I don't hate any communities - other than paedophiles. I hate them with a passion.

 

Blimey, a Like from Polydectes? If I didn't have to take my car to Tunbridge Wells for a service now, I'd need to go and lie down in a darkened room. That's a manly slapping-on-the-back hug, Poly - wouldn't want you getting the wrong idea?? - -

 

Even the ones that have never violated a child and try to seek help?

 

Lol, not at all. Seeing things from a different perspective is big part of communication.

Once I talk to people and stop talking at them I find out many things.

The trick is asking the right question and listening thanks for being honest

 

I wouldn't consider you a pedophile if you haven't violated a child.

 

Pedophila is the condition by which the individual has the attraction to children, regardless of whether or not they actually act upon it. An individual can also sexually assault a child with no attraction, and not be a pedophilles. The attraction is the defining factor, not the physical assault.

 

again I only consider people pedophiles if they assault children. I don't know why I have to repeat that.

See above.

 

What you consider real is irrelevant to facts. The fact remains that pedophila is a psychological disorder that results is an individual's sexual attraction to children, regardless of whether they act upon it or not. The fact also remains that one can sexually assault a child without being a pedophile. You might as well say that you don't consider people black if they are not of a certain shade or darker, despite their factual heritage.

 

The problem is your definition and the actual definition are two different things.

-phile and -philia are defined as a fondness for a specified thing. Such as Bibliophile, Audiophile, Pedophile.

Now in the psychological world, fetishes are called paraphilias. The experience of intense sexual arousal to atypical objects, situations, fantasies, behaviors, or individuals.

A good example would be Kleptophilia - The sexual arousal caused by the thought or act of stealing things. Some of those people can get the arousal just by watching others stealing. Say one of those shows on TruYV like "World's Worst" (the episodes about shoplifters, petty thieves, and the like).

They've done nothing wrong, they have not committed any criminal acts...but they're still a Kleptophile. They still get their jollies from seeing/fantasizing about theft. Much like a Pedophile who has never molested any children nor promoted the molestation of children by acquiring child pornographic materials. They are still pedophiles because they still have the sexual arousal in regards to children.

 

I never said what I considered real was relevant. In a psychological setting you would be correct but this isn't one of those and if you were to walk up to somebody and tell them that you're a pedophile they would probably think you f*** children. That isn't me that's the meaning of the word as common parlance defines it.

pedophilia is a word we invented to describe something. The average Joe meaning most people therefore common parlance will automatically think of a child ****er. You can print out all the definitions and s*** analogies you wish it won't change that fact.

People tend to reject to that because it's seen as normalizing pedophilia. I wish you luck with your crusade.

 

it isn't a problem. A problem only exists when were talking about semantics.

There is no actual definition definitions are descriptive not prescriptive.

If someone says they're a pedophile and most people think they're talking about being a child f***** that is what the word means. It's like what the word cool or gay or awful means. These words change meaning based on how they're used.

psychology has a s*** ton of jargon. And it means something quite specific in a psychological setting. We aren't talking about that.

If they've done nothing wrong they probably don't prance up and down the street telling everyone how they're a pedophile. Because that word doesn't mean the same thing in common parlance that it does in a very specific area of study.

What's like the term psychopath. These people may not have committed any crimes or even done anything wrong. But you don't Pratt's up and down the streets claiming about how you're a psychopath because that word means something different outside of a therapists office

An example of this shaft. If I was in a garage working on cars shaft would mean a solid steel or other material with flanges on either end that connected to power and output. It would mean something completely different if I was talking to people who repair elevators or fans of the movie.

 

I was the one with the @#$% analogies. Point your ire towards the correct targets please.

The small problem with that way of thinking is that while the average person may think "Child @#$%er" when they hear Pedophile...the legal system does not.

If they did...pedophiles who were convicted of molesting children would never be released from prison. How could they be? They can no more stop being attracted to children than I can stop being attracted to women. So if being a pedophile was a crime...why are they ever released? It's not like there's a cure. Doctors aren't seeing patients and saying "Bit of a wrong'un eh? Well no worries. Take these three times a day for a month and you'll be filling your trousers at the sight of bikini-clad ladies like the rest of us."

No pedophile in the US was ever convicted simply on the evidence of their being a pedophile. They were arrested, tried and convicted of crimes of child molestation and/or child abuse.

 

These words are the target I was aiming at when I called something a s*** analogy.

They show up in Marquiscat's post not yours.

Your analogies were apt.

that's just another very specialized set of jargon that doesn't apply to most people.

The legal system has voluptuous tomes stuffed full of jargon picked from dead languages and you have to take about 8 years of school just to decipher this. So illegal definition would apply in court and would also require some explanation from experts to make sure it's understood correctly

That is hardly common parlance.

pedophelia isn't illegal word neither is rape no one's ever been convicted of rape. Rape is common parlance for sexual assault and aggravated sexual assault.

So just because words have really no meaning in a court of law doesn't mean they have no meaning at all.

 

Teen charged with three counts of rape.

RCW 9A.44.040 Rape in the first degree.

Aggravated Rape Law and Legal Definition

18-year-old charged with rape, murder of homeless woman in downtown Baltimore

 

Yet you embrace a book that cherry-picks facts and puts religious views over science. Why?

 

So we're abandoning the discussion about pedophilia?

 

No just convicted paedophiles; until they've been convicted they're not paedophiles in my book, only individuals with an unhealthy interest in children.

 

It seriously aggravates me when paedophilia is 'associated' (wrong word but I'm pushed for time) with gays because gays are no more likely to be paedophiles than heteros. Indeed I'd guess less so.

 

Pedophilia is a disorder where people can't form relations with adults. In layman's terms, they are more f**cked up than a blind man's tackle box.

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
...The distinction between a victim's gender and a perpetrator's sexual orientation is important because many child molesters don't really have an adult sexual orientation. They have never developed the capacity for mature sexual relationships with other adults, either men or women. Instead, their sexual attractions focus on children – boys, girls, or children of both sexes.

Over the years, this fact has been incorporated into various systems for categorizing child molesters. For example, Finkelhor and Araji (1986) proposed that perpetrators' sexual attractions should be conceptualized as ranging along a continuum – from exclusive interest in children at one extreme, to exclusive interest in adult partners at the other end.

Typologies of offenders have often included a distinction between those with an enduring primary preference for children as sexual partners and those who have established age-appropriate relationships but become sexually involved with children under unusual circumstances of extreme stress. Perpetrators in the first category – those with a more or less exclusive interest in children – have been labeled fixated. Fixation means "a temporary or permanent arrestment of psychological maturation resulting from unresolved formative issues which persist and underlie the organization of subsequent phases of development" (Groth & Birnbaum, 1978, p. 176). Many clinicians view fixated offenders as being "stuck" at an early stage of psychological development.

By contrast, other molesters are described as regressed. Regression is "a temporary or permanent appearance of primitive behavior after more mature forms of expression had been attained, regardless of whether the immature behavior was actually manifested earlier in the individual's development" (Groth & Birnbaum, 1978, p. 177). Regressed offenders have developed an adult sexual orientation but under certain conditions (such as extreme stress) they return to an earlier, less mature psychological state and engage in sexual contact with children.

Some typologies of child molesters divide the fixation-regression distinction into multiple categories, and some include additional categories as well (e.g., Knight, 1989).

For the present discussion, the important point is that many child molesters cannot be meaningfully described as homosexuals, heterosexuals, or bisexuals (in the usual sense of those terms) because they are not really capable of a relationship with an adult man or woman. Instead of gender, their sexual attractions are based primarily on age. These individuals – who are often characterized as fixated – are attracted to children, not to men or women.

 

Sexual orientation is defined as reproductive functions?
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20170721213639AAXRK5Y

 

Post edited.

 

Partially it most certainly is. Sex however involves FAR more than makin' babies.

Hell I got snipped so I can enjoy it without worrying about making them.

 

post edited.

 

I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Sexual orientation addresses only what gender you are attracted to, referenced against your own gender. At no point in my post did I say anything about reproductive functions.

 

A book full of "Dumb and Dumber" should hardly be categorized by any thinking person as excellent.

When a straight man looks out into the world he sees many women. Some he is attracted to and others he is not. It is not that he chose to be attracted to some women but not others ... he just is or he is not.

Just because this straight man is not attracted to some women - does not make him gay.

It the same way, when a man looks out into the world and is attracted to men. This is not something he chooses. It is just the way things are.

Whether it is genetic or chemistry .. one does not choose who one is attracted to.