Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

take this quiz
http://www.zipperfish.com/free/quiz/jailbait2004-pop.html
you better not be, or i'll come after you with an angry mob of mothers!

edit: oh yeah, this quiz is only for guys..... and lesbians


NO NUDITY!

http://www.zipperfish.com/free/quizimages/jailbait2004-1.jpg

i have taken it before and no i aint

Im not even going to ask how you found this.

I am not a pedophile .

It called me a dumbass!
NO, I AM NOT A PEDOPHILE!

"But when some of those ppl turn 18....."

So basically they're hot now but you are waiting till they're legal to avoid criminal prosecution?

You're no better than a paedophile and nor is anyone who says that kind of thing. Hypocricy in it's highest form.

-AC

great stuff

Uh....what?

****ing hell AC, hes allowed to say a young girl is hot, a pedophile would act on it, he didnt, he is waiting. So he isnt a pedophile.

Not really... I completely agree with The Inkeeper.

How come none of you can spell peodophile? Or is that the British spelling?

Pedophile is the proper spelling. They're just illiterate.

I have no idea what you are all talking about....

This kinda only applies to where its the law to have sex at the age 18+. It's 16 here!

What, British people are illiterate?

No, whoever spells it pedofile or any other variation. The only proper spelling is "pedophile"

Jkozzy, agreeing with me is the best thing to do

Pedophile? ME?
Pfft.
Bugger off, AC.

Oh, right

It's "Paedophile" actually.

Actually I think it's both.

Then we're both right then!

Yay! happybday

Why did i bring this up

Paedophile is the English spelling. Pedophile is the American version, because Americans aren't too good with silent letters or non-literal spellings...

'****ing hell AC, hes allowed to say a young girl is hot, a pedophile would act on it, he didnt, he is waiting. So he isnt a pedophile.'

This isn't logical.

I can't be a pedophile yet. Well, maybe those 13 year olds would get me in trouble, but really, none of the other choices would. It's all good.

i got emailed from some guy i dont know


i have to change my screen name again...

"****ing hell AC, hes allowed to say a young girl is hot, a pedophile would act on it, he didnt, he is waiting. So he isnt a pedophile."

Whenever there's a paedophile story on the news, one of the most common things brought up is "He has mental problems" or "He's sick in the head". If mental problems or being sick in the head are where it all starts then he already is a paedophile, coz the instinct is there. He has sexual or non-platonic feelings towards a girl of illegal age. He is no different from a paedophile.

Alpha Centauri Says: "SMASH HYPOCRICY!"

-AC

Wow.
Dude, did I ever say I wanted to have sex with them? No.
WTF....I-I-..............
..............
...................
......................
.........................

"Wow.
Dude, did I ever say I wanted to have sex with them? No.
WTF....I-I-..............
..............
...................
......................
........................."

Does a paedophile ever SAY it? Not always. They think of it, hence why they are called sick in the head. Just like you THOUGHT it or at least thought non-platonic things. Otherwise why would you wanna wait till they were 18? My post still stands.

-AC

Wha'-
Oh forget it.

Fine, if AC'll be happy:
I AM A PEDOPHILE.

All that you are lacking from being a convicted paedophile is the committing of an act. The rest is all there so yeah, you are technically.

-AC

Whatever dude!
Yeah, I'm off to go watch some teenagers who are underage!
BTW, when did you become an expert on Pedophilia? And I guess half of North American men, (and some women), are pedophiles aswell?.....

So if you saw a very hot young girl walking down the street, and thought ' i wouldnt mind a piece of that ' and she was under-age, that makes you a paedophile? No, it doesnt. Just because he finds an attractive girl attractive doesnt make him a paedophile, it would be hard not to the way half of them flaunt their bodies now. If he did however try to groom one of these girls, then yeah hes a paedophile, if he find them sexually attractive but does nothing about it, then no, he isnt.

When they're 18 they're legal aren't they? So doesn't that show that he cares about the fact they're underage making him NOT a Paedophile?

Calm down DS.
I don't care.

Btw, I'd LOVE to see what AC's results were....

Exactly Thael, the very fact he said ;when they turn 18' shows he isnt willing to commit a sexual act with an underage girl, making him not a paedophile

not a pedofile

"BTW, when did you become an expert on Pedophilia? And I guess half of North American men, (and some women), are pedophiles aswell?....."

That's the irony of it. When one of the many under age female celebs in the US, becomes legal, she'll ALL OF A SUDDEN go from "cute" to "sexy". Purely because all the people who thought it when she was underage, can now openly say it without being considered a paedophile. It's the height of hypocricy that these are the kind of people who will cause the most uproar when a boy/man rapes an underages girl.

"Just because he finds an attractive girl attractive doesnt make him a paedophile, it would be hard not to the way half of them flaunt their bodies now. If he did however try to groom one of these girls, then yeah hes a paedophile, if he find them sexually attractive but does nothing about it, then no, he isnt."

Go and read my other post. Paedophile is always being written down to the offender being "sick in the head" for having those thoughts of the girl, not necessarily the acting out. ARC has obviously had or been having those thoughts. If the thoughts maketh the paedo, then a paedo he be. Simple as. If you know a girl is underage and admit sexual attraction you are no different from a paedophile. If I were to see a girl, find her attractive then find out her age, all attraction would be gone because the age association would be there. It's like if you kissed your sister and didn't know, then found out. I doubt the kiss would still be as valid.

Next.

-AC

wtf AC?
dont you find it harsh to lable the guy a pedophile?
since when are men born with a program which automatically recognises
that a girl is of legal age, regardless of how developed she is, and how provocative she dresses? the whole point of the flash movie was to illustrate the hypocracy behind the lable of pedophile. in our society, we like to judge people, and judge harshly.

the underage celebrities are role models for young girls, and dress like sex symbols. and lets face it, they are gorgeous. so arc is a potential freaking child molester because he can see this?

a pedophile gets off on children...so realistically, one such wacko would probably be turned on by little kids who LOOK like little kids, not who look like adults. what would you call a condition for someone who is turned on by younger women who dont look young? bullshit, thats what.

i can see the possability that you are just trying to prove a point on hypocracy, but perhaps you can do it without labeling someone else a potential kiddie fondler.

Wow....
People have rallied to defend me....
*Awestruck*
Lol, I don't care.
Oh, and btw AC, that post up ahead doesn't make sense:
"If I were to see a girl, find her attractive then find out her age, all attraction would be gone because the age association would be there. It's like if you kissed your sister and didn't know, then found out. I doubt the kiss would still be as valid.

Next.

-AC"

In YOUR logic, that makes you a paedophile as well.
NEXT!

Hear hear!

"since when are men born with a program which automatically recognises
that a girl is of legal age, regardless of how developed she is, and how provocative she dresses? the whole point of the flash movie was to illustrate the hypocracy behind the lable of pedophile. in our society, we like to judge people, and judge harshly."

Reeeeaaaaad the posts. He didn't say it without knowing her age. He said "Just wait till some of those turn 18". We can now move on.

"the underage celebrities are role models for young girls, and dress like sex symbols. and lets face it, they are gorgeous. so arc is a potential freaking child molester because he can see this?"

No. He said those things while knowing they are underage. The only difference between him and a paedophile as I JUST SAID, is the fact that he hasn't acted it out. Which doesn't matter if paedophilia is determined by, as so many people believe, the thoughts not the acting.

"a pedophile gets off on children..."

Anyone under age is a child, technically. That's where the term comes from.

"what would you call a condition for someone who is turned on by younger women who dont look young? bullshit, thats what."

What would you call someone who blatantly has sexual attraction toward a girl of improper age, openly says it (by this time 1 of the two main paedophilic aspects are there, that being the main one)?

"i can see the possability that you are just trying to prove a point on hypocracy, but perhaps you can do it without labeling someone else a potential kiddie fondler."

The man gave me just reason to. If you read all of my posts correctly you wouldn't have typed out that big misunderstanding post that you just did.

-AC

If he hasnt acted it out he ISNT a paedophile!

Your lying when you say the attraction would be gone, being attracted to sombody isnt somethingyou can turn off and on

Wow....lol....
I've gotta' go now, to eat dinner and be attracted by young women....

All of this because he made a passing comment about waiting for some of them to turn 18? (as I said before, this doesn't make him a Paedophile otherwise the age wouldn't bother him).

I think this needs to be dropped before it gets out of hand, this is supposed to be a thread about a comical game, not discussing each others supposed "Paedophilia".

"Your lying when you say the attraction would be gone, being attracted to sombody isnt somethingyou can turn off and on "

Numero one:

Don't tell me I'm lying just because you lack an ability I possess.

Numero two:

When I was with my girlfriend I didn't feel the need to have a sexual attraction to girls I saw anymore. Because it was gone, I have that kind of willpower as do many others. If you were attracted to someone you were related to and didn't know it, then found out. That attraction would be gone faster than a snowball in Hell.

-AC

You're doing it again Centauri... making sweeping statements because someone doesn't conform to your idea of standard society. We're in the OTF, jesus... you need to chill out or go back to the GDF.

"I've gotta' go now, to eat dinner and be attracted by young women...."

You said it, not me.

"All of this because he made a passing comment about waiting for some of them to turn 18? (as I said before, this doesn't make him a Paedophile otherwise the age wouldn't bother him)."

No, all this because everyone became hypocritcal bastards. Criminally it doesn't make him a paedophile. Technically, as paedophilia is said to begin with the thoughts, he is.

"You're doing it again Centauri... making sweeping statements because someone doesn't conform to your idea of standard society. We're in the OTF, jesus... you need to chill out or go back to the GDF."

Put the thread in there and then we'll continue it. The thread is here so that's where it's getting debated. I love the way people react like a bomb to things I say, then when I reply I get picked out. It's not MY view of society, it's society itself. Quick to accuse when a majority of the time it's just as bad.

-AC

Bullshit.
You can't turn off an emotion.

If it required "willpower" you are clearly ignoring attractions to other females doesn't mean you don't look at a girl and go "Hmmm, she's nice".

Argh... OMG. I find some of my brother's mates attractive, admittedly they're all now 17... but when they were 15 or so and I was 18, I still did. But I never acted upon it, not once. Although they were all extremely well proportioned naughty and obviously young men, I was 18, they were under 16, it wasn't gonna happen. Am I a paedophile for thinking about them??

"Bullshit.
You can't turn off an emotion."

YOU can't.

"If it required "willpower" you are clearly ignoring attractions to other females doesn't mean you don't look at a girl and go "Hmmm, she's nice"."

That's true. Maybe willpower was the wrong term to use. The right way to say it would be that I can actually stop doing things I don't want to do. Or that are needless, it's a basic human ability. Try it.

-AC

Exactly... what are you Centauri? A man or a machine?

"Exactly... what are you Centauri? A man or a machine?"

A man with the abilties every man has but not every man uses.

Simple answer to a simple question .

-AC

Numero One--- An ability you possess, an ability seemingly ONLY you possess, out of every male i have ever known. The ability to choose who your attracted to? and turn it off an on like a lightswitch?
I still say your lying, and thats my opinion so dont tell me to change it, and i have a right to express it.

Numero Two--- you actually fused two points together in this one, thats not strictly true now is it? I am willing to bet that if you read the agony aunt sections of newspapers you can find people who got together, found out they were related but stayed together. If you have a connection with sombody, a new piece of information isnt going to just destroy everything is it? It would make things....different and perhaps harder, but it wouldnt end them quicker than a 'snowball in hell'

Now, seeing as finding an underage girl attractive makes a guy a paedophile, does this post mean im pro-incest to you?

flirt You love this, you dirty dawg

WooWoo!! *soccer type cheering* toot

toot Pwned. toot thumbsup

"Numero One--- An ability you possess, an ability seemingly ONLY you possess, out of every male i have ever known. The ability to choose who your attracted to? and turn it off an on like a lightswitch?
I still say your lying, and thats my opinion so dont tell me to change it, and i have a right to express it."

Well I always said I was unique . Seriously though, I know people, MANY MANY people who possess that ability. You can say that I am lying all you like, go for it. I, the very person you are addressing with that claim, say that I am not. My opinion of myself has a little more umph than your opinion of what I am thinking.

"If you have a connection with sombody, a new piece of information isnt going to just destroy everything is it? It would make things....different and perhaps harder, but it would end them quicker than a 'snowball in heaven'"

Not in Heaven, no. Secondly, believe it or not, in the situation I spoke of when I was with someone, my brain (as it has a habit of doing) retained the information that I was attracted to my girlfriend. When in a relationship, I don't have sexual attractions to other females I see walking along the street. As unbelievably shocking as you find it to be, that is the truth. I believe I have the last word on the way I perceive things.

-AC

flirt Im just a man with the abilties every man has but not every man uses.

Yes, you can stop doing, anyone can, but it is impossible and I mean IMPOSSIBLE to stop feeling.

Numero one- ok Your lying. God damns all liars, so when you get down there, you can talk to the paedophiles and maybe they can clear things up for you

Numero two- i edited it, ok i posted heaven instead of hell, no need to point that out. Yeah ok, when your in a relationship you dont have sexual attractions to other females you see? That cant be possible man! the human body is programmed to become aroused when it sees something stimulating, you cant close your eyes click your heels and suddenly lose all your mojo

"Yes, you can stop doing, anyone can, but it is impossible and I mean IMPOSSIBLE to stop feeling."

Apparantly not. Things aren't impossible because you or people you know can't do them. Learn this.

Also, to Innkeeper's pro-incest claim. That is a great difference, you are finding out AFTER. He already knows the girl is underage. If you think a girl is pretty, fair enough. Loads of people say "Your daughter is very pretty". It's a passive claim. However, saying "Just wait till some of those turn 18" pretty much says to me that he has thoughts about them that could only be acted upon when they are legal. What do you think those could be? Hmm?

Secondly, if paedophilia never existed and he wasn't gonna be ridiculed for acting upon an underaged girl, would he still wait for them to become 18? The answer is most likely, "No".

-AC

"Numero one- ok Your lying. God damns all liars, so when you get down there, you can talk to the paedophiles and maybe they can clear things up for you"

See you down there . And no, I'm not lying.

"Yeah ok, when your in a relationship you dont have sexual attractions to other females you see? That cant be possible man! the human body is programmed to become aroused when it sees something stimulating, you cant close your eyes click your heels and suddenly lose all your mojo"

That is all you have, the fact that you believe it "isn't possible" just coz you can't do it. Which needless to say is pointless isn't it? "You're lying" "Why?" "It can't be possible."

You don't just LOSE mojo. I just save it for the girl I'm with at the time and coincidentally, the one who has the ability to activate said mojo at the time. If you choose to not believe what I am saying, knock yourself out. But if this comes down to a debate on "How Alpha Centauri views things", I will be the one winning it. Because guess what? That Alpha Centauri guy that we are discussing, is me.

Hahahaha. KMC, good wholesome fun for all the family.

-AC

thumbsup

That's why the term paedophilia is causing problems, it refers to an arbitrary age which has no relation to biology.

Technically, if someone has the capacity to find someone under the arbitrarily chosen age of what defines an adult, then it is an act of paedophilia by the definition of the term.

AC is right

Paedophilia (as you guys are discussing it anyway) can also be looked on as a restriction of the law.

In some countries the age of consent isn't 18. Here (The UK) for example for example the legal age of consent is 16, so someone who is having attractions/sexual relations in this country can be looked on as a Paedophile by someone from another country where the age of consent is different.

And the female in the particular quiz aren't exactly "children" they're teenagers, Paedophiles usually target very small children so if you find a small child attractive, you DO have problems.

Note: "Paedophile"

Noun- An adult who is sexually attracted to children.

Can we please drop it now?

I really don't care anymore....
Say I was attracted to these "underage" women, but I knew that those thoughts were wrong-does that make me a paedophile who's aware of his paedophilia?

Neither do I.

Tell you what, lets talk about Necrophilia, thats legal here!

"Say I was attracted to these "underage" women, but I knew that those thoughts were wrong-does that make me a paedophile who's aware of his paedophilia?"

Yes. The definition of the word is "A sexual attraction in which children are the object."

Technically and legally, being a teenager does no make you an adult. You are a child until 18. Anyone under 18 is legally a child and since it's the law we're going by, that would mean you had conducted an act of paedophilia.

"Tell you what, lets talk about Necrophilia, thats legal here!"

Hahahaha. Well, that's one way to liven the thread up I guess. It was getting a little dead...DEAD.

-AC

Or Pyronecrobestiality!

I just noticed the word "Bestiality" and decided I will sit out of this debate.

You guys go ahead.

-AC

no actually, lets pause here a second, though i do admire your initiative.
i just need to get something straight...just so i know from what i've read here...

ok, what you are saying is, for example: if some guy dated an 18 year old, it would be cool right? but if he knew her when she was late 17 and thought she was cute, he would be of the same mentality of one who would enjoy fondling a child.

so its all based on some finely tuned timeclock then right? on the stroke of midnight on her 18th birthday, the child becomes a woman....right? ok...so a pedophile is NOT one who is turned on by children, but simply by a want to play "beat the clock"?




so, you are saying, is that ARC is TECHNICALLY the scum of the earth by default...right? funny, i always thought it was a MENTAL DISORDER. you cant just sit on some high throne and declare all of psychiatric research on this disorder as bullshit and declare that you can be a 'technical pedophile' or 'potential molester by default'.

i will just remind you that you are calling another member a pedophile, and instead of reading the technical definition of the word, maybe look into the symptoms. pedophiles are turned on by children. not young women who are technically underage, but by kids who LOOK underage, ok? logic please

Let me address the last part first:

"and instead of reading the technical definition of the word, maybe look into the symptoms. pedophiles are turned on by children. not young women who are technically underage, but by kids who LOOK underage, ok? logic please"

Yes but....but but.....the definition is fact. So....so you're saying to ignore fact, to ignore the definition of paedophilia....in a debate about paedophilia.

Logic, ok?

"ok, what you are saying is, for example: if some guy dated an 18 year old, it would be cool right? but if he knew her when she was late 17 and thought she was cute, he would be of the same mentality of one who would enjoy fondling a child.

so its all based on some finely tuned timeclock then right? on the stroke of midnight on her 18th birthday, the child becomes a woman....right? ok...NOW lets go on."

The definition of the word paedophilia says, as posted "A sexual attraction to children." Technically......TECHNICALLY, anyone under the age of 18 is a child. Legally also. Using the timelock is an escape but the law isn't gonna waive is it? I totally see what you are saying but if it came up in court and the guy said "She was 18 in a year" the court isn't gonna go: "Oh well alright you rascal. Get awn outta here ya little scamp" are they? No.

"so, you are saying, is that ARC is TECHNICALLY the scum of the earth by default...right?"

Talk about blowing things out of proportion.

*Throws you a chill pill*

Calm down.

"funny, i always thought it was a MENTAL DISORDER. you cant just sit on some high throne and declare all of psychiatric research on this disorder as bullshit and declare that you can be a 'technical pedophile' or 'potential molester by default'."

Some perfectly sane males have been convicted paedophiles. It's not always put down to medical problems with the mind. Paedophilia isn't a disease, it's an illegal preference. There's a big difference. If someone who happens to be perfectly sane decides to commit an act of paedophilia, it doesn't make them subject or victim of a mental disorder/disease.

"i will just remind you that you are calling another member a pedophile"

I will remind you that he admitted he was (jokingly perhaps), he asked if what he did makes him a paedophile (which technically, as stated and proved but ignored by you, it does). I said he's NO DIFFERENT. However by definition, lots of people are. The definition isn't what it takes to convict but it doesn't mean it is an eraseable fact. It stands.

-AC

"edit: oh yeah, this quiz is only for guys..... and lesbians"


You do realize straight women can be and are pedafiles too.

haha, oh dear, i didnt even see that.

Yeah, just like BF said, women can and there are those who are paedophiles. Gender and sexual orientation play a little part in that.

It is actually the definition on which the law is based.

However I feel the thread has wandered.

a perfectly sane pedophile...we have a new oxymoron

why cant you just accept that it's very name and definition is based in psychiatry. a pedophile is one who is sexually attracted to children. its the fact that they look young and underdeveloped that turns them on.

its not about some guy who got screwed over because he forgot to do a background check on his date. news flash: plenty of teen girls look like they are in their 20s, and wont say otherwise. the court could slam that guy and label him/her a pedophile. so let us separate law and technicalities from psychiatry.

PVS.....I never you you could be so political!

NO JAILBAIT 4 U
YOU ARE NOT A PEDOPHILE!
YOU LIKE ONLY WOMEN THAT ARE OF LEGAL AGE.
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO APPLY FOR THAT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHING POSITION.

this test is crap.

you think?

laugh1 haha!

what are YOU laughing at?

hysterical

You!

"its not about some guy who got screwed over because he forgot to do a background check on his date. news flash: plenty of teen girls look like they are in their 20s, and wont say otherwise. the court could slam that guy and label him/her a pedophile. so let us separate law and technicalities from psychiatry."

As it has been said, the definition is what the law is based upon. I didn't think it was and my debate was still strong enough. Victor studies law, and brought it to light that the law is based on the definition that any sexual attraction toward an underage girl (notice it doesn't state how underage) is an act of paedophilia.

"why cant you just accept that it's very name and definition is based in psychiatry."

You claimed it was always down to having some kind of a mental disorder. You also seem to not believe it counts regardless of if you're underage by a little, it does.

-AC

you know I don't HAVE to like you

flirt1 no, you dont HAVE to, G, but you do.

I'm not going to lie... I would nail Hilary Duff in a second if she offered, regaurdless of her age, I would nail the Olsen Twins, regaurdless of age, Lindsay Lohan would get ripped apart. It's not my fault they dress like sluts and look good. If they don't like it they shouldn't be purposely dressing in a sexy manner.

"I'm not going to lie... I would nail Hilary Duff in a second if she offered, regaurdless of her age, I would nail the Olsen Twins, regaurdless of age, Lindsay Lohan would get ripped apart. It's not my fault they dress like sluts and look good. If they don't like it they shouldn't be purposely dressing in a sexy manner."

Absolutely is it in no way your FAULT and I entirely agree that they do push things in the way the put themselves across. However by law and definition, that is considered an act of paedophilia. That is ALL I'm saying. I'm not even claiming that I believe everyone who looks at a girl under 18 (within age) is a paedophile. My first post against what ARC said was just of the hypocricy surrounding those type of feelings. I know and have seen so many males verbally tear into a guy convicted of paedophilia or something, when they see no problem in just saying it. When in fact by saying it, you are doing exactly as that guy did, minus the carrying out of the act.

-AC

I love how you edited the post when you found out it was BF....

Hmmm, you are aware that over-confidence is one of my least favourite traits

"When in fact by saying it, you are doing exactly as that guy did, minus the carrying out of the act."

You can't be a pedofile unless you act on those feelings. Someone saying "yeah I'd nail that" about Hilary Duff is not the same or even remotely similar by use of any valid logic as a person who goes and screws a 5 year old child. Pedofilia = the act of engaging in sexual intercourse with a person under age, not saying "Yeah I'd **** lizzie macgiure". Big difference. Words don't equal pedofilia, actions do.

And besides, there's two types of pedophilia, there's pedophilia by technicality, which would be if you screwed a 16 year old girl who is able to make her own decisions about such a matter, and then there's blatant pedophilia which is pretty much 100% inexcusable, which would be someone screwing a young child who can't make decisions on their own and doesn't know any better.

"I'm not even claiming that I believe everyone who looks at a girl under 18 (within age) is a paedophile. My first post against what ARC said was just of the hypocricy surrounding those type of feelings."

To ARC: The above bit is all I put in because I got tired of everyone having the misconception that I think everyone who looks at a girl under 18 is a convicted paedophile and the scum of the Earth. I've debate with Backfire before, the fact that it's him makes no difference to me. I'm sure he either knows that or doesn't care, like I don't care.

"You can't be a pedofile unless you act on those feelings. Someone saying "yeah I'd nail that" about Hilary Duff is not the same or even remotely similar by use of any valid logic as a person who goes and screws a 5 year old child. Pedofilia = the act of engaging in sexual intercourse with a person under age, not saying "Yeah I'd **** lizzie macgiure". Big difference. Words don't equal pedofilia, actions do."

I agree for most of that, but my actual point that everyone is missing is this: By definition and law, although not convictable (for some reason), someone under legal age being the object of sexual attraction is an act of paedophilia. Intercourse is not mentioned in the definition.

"And besides, there's two types of pedophilia, there's pedophilia by technicality, which would be if you screwed a 16 year old girl who is able to make her own decisions about such a matter, and then there's blatant pedophilia which is pretty much 100% inexcusable, which would be someone screwing a young child who can't make decisions on their own and doesn't know any better."

Again I agree for most. As I did with people who have said the same thing before you. The point is as Vic said, Biology is of no connection. Time also. My point was always of the hypocricy surrounding the comment ARC made and people who make comments like that. My point was also as stated above, regardless of what you do or don't do, act out or don't act out, by definition you are committing an act of paedophilia by saying such things. I never said it was ever as bad as committing the acts in person, I said that in ARCs case he has little or no difference because it is, as said, by definition. And the definition is where the law is derived from.

-AC

And people wonder why pedophilia and rape and shit like that happens. What a tard.




****ing crap, I can't throw a rock without hitting an absolute moron.

think about it, you claim that anyone who could look at...say hillary duff and say "i'd hit that" is a technical pedafile...since he thought of it...

but answer me this...but by your logic, if i had a fantasy about a girl, would it not be TECHNICALLY rape if she didnt consent?

"And people wonder why pedophilia and rape and shit like that happens. What a tard."

Exactly. Then they complain "But I only dressed to attract his view. I didn't want him to overpower me and rape me because he was sexually attracted to me because I dressed like a ****".

-AC

Women don't consent to you in your own FANTASIES? Wow. Sad, sad man.

No, it wouldn't be rape, becuase rape is having sex with the person against their will. I see where AC is coming from, you don't have to preform the act to be a pedophile. Just like you don't have to be in a relationship to say you love someone. It's just a name for a thought. You however, do have to preform the act to be convicted.

lol no i mean the actual woman

"think about it, you claim that anyone who could look at...say hillary duff and say "i'd hit that" is a technical pedafile...since he thought of it..."

The word claims that. Who am I to you know, defy the definition of a word in the English language?

"but answer me this...but by your logic, if i had a fantasy about a girl, would it not be TECHNICALLY rape if she didnt consent?"

Rape is by definition and by my terms, an ACT that is carried out first and foremost. It is forced sexual intercourse. It isn't "A thought of forced sexual intercourse." Paedophilia by definition, as stated maaaaaaaaany times, is an attraction to underaged people specifically.

How many more times am I gonna have to explain that to you? Genuine question.

-AC

no no no

rape by law is simply nonconsentual sex.
thats the law. "i didnt want to have sex"
rape is not always violent. an example would be those 'perfectly sane pedofiles' you spoke of. they were most likely convicted of stachetory rape (if the girls were over like 16) and im sure they could have brought up an allout sexual assault charge. point is they have the word "rape" tagged to their record. so TECHNICALLY they are rapists.

Now you are mixing things together. Thinking about rape, and preforming stachetory rape is NOT the same thing.

"rape is not always violent. an example would be those 'perfectly sane pedofiles' you spoke of. they were most likely convicted of stachetory rape (if the girls were over like 16) and im sure they could have brought up an allout sexual assault charge. point is they have the word "rape" tagged to their record. so TECHNICALLY they are rapists."

Rapists are sex offenders. Sex offenders can also be paedophiles considering the age of the victim.

"No no no. Rape by law is simply non consentual sex. That's the law: 'I didn't want to have sex'"

So a girl has to state "I didn't want to be paedophile'd"? What do you mean "No no no rape is non consentual sex"? That's what I said it was. You are forgetting the difference however:

Rape: A Crime. An act. However it is only a crime because it's an act. Thinking about rape is not illegal. Rape is an acted crime.

Paedophilia: Sexual attraction to underaged youngsters. That is by definition, a crime. Before it's acted.

-AC

"Now you are mixing things together. Thinking about rape, and preforming stachetory rape is NOT the same thing."

no, you misunderstand...*sigh* it was just a quick joke,
but now i have to spell it out

in your fantasy she consents, but not the actual woman. like you didnt call her up and say "would it be ok if i had a fantasy about you?"

"To ARC: The above bit is all I put in because I got tired of everyone having the misconception that I think everyone who looks at a girl under 18 is a convicted paedophile and the scum of the Earth. I've debate with Backfire before, the fact that it's him makes no difference to me. I'm sure he either knows that or doesn't care, like I don't care.
-AC"

I know.

as i said, you blur written rational laws and irrational human behavior in such a simple manner. you cant categorise someone who says "i'd tap hillary duff" right alongside some sick freak who's turned on by children.

No, I know that's what you meant, and what I said still applies. Thinking about it and acting on it are two completely different things. Having a fantasy is just that, a fantasy. If you needed to ask permission, then the whole fantasy is ruined.

"you cant categorise someone who says "i'd tap hillary duff" right alongside some sick freak who's turned on by children"

*Sigh*

Read one of my above posts. The one in which I stated I don't do that. My point has always been that by law and definition, you are no different from someone who says it and then acts on it. Chances are, they thought the same thing too. You took this way beyond what my posts put across and then ran with it, instead of stopping to see what I was saying.

-AC

well honestly i wouldn't know...i never tried it
im not trying to sell that idea, dont worry. im just pointing out
that a persons thinking cant be put under the scrutiny of the law in reality, so whats the point of trying to tag people and call them a 'technical pedophile'?

ok here ya go, ill wind it up, cause im tired (and got a bad cold )

a pedophile follows a pattern of behavior, its not just some legal tag. its important that this is not blurred, not for the sake of stachetory rapists, but for the sake of those who have a REAL pedophile living in their neighborhood. people raising families dont give a shit about the 25 year old guy dating the 17 year old girl. they want to know who they have to keep their kids away from.

"people raising families dont give a shit about the 25 year old guy dating the 17 year old girl. they want to know who they have to keep their kids away from."

True of course. However just because they don't give a shit, doesn't mean the law and definition does not apply, convictable or not. Which is my point.

-AC

Again, someone can be twisting something here. Just becasue they are laws or basic definitions it doesn't mean is correct. Remenber that before a crime is committed someone has plan the crime inside their minds.

"Remenber that before a crime is committed someone has plan the crime inside their minds."

As stated above though. You cannot say "Rape need not involve sexual acts with a woman."

You CAN say that paedophilia begins with the fantasies and urges.

-AC

But not all fantasies or urges will lead to Paedophilia. Some will and others would not. There is a difference between desire and committing the act.

"But not all fantasies or urges will lead to Paedophilia. Some will and others would not. There is a difference between desire and committing the act."

Yeah that's true but it differs between person. However a law is a law for a reason. It has to apply to everyone before hand coz you never know that they'll commit the act or not.

-AC

"i think the same applies. if you say "hillary duff is cute, because she has nice cans...etc, too bad shes underage" i dont think that falls under the pedophilia category. a true pedophile is turned on by youngness, as i stated before."

Well then you are more or less eradicating the chance of acting upon it.

BUT....as I keep saying:

MY POINT was that (and I don't put guys who say "she's hot" next to convicted paedophiles) if you have a sexual attraction to underaged people, by definition it is an act of paedophila. That is ALL I WAS SAYING.

So you are going with the definition that includes the word preference, coz it helps? The definition on Dictionary.Com doesn't have that nor does any other one I've seen.

-AC

The law is for keeping all citizens safe. Is to mantain social order. Now, that doesn't mean everyone is going to be a suspect for having criminal thoughts. A guy can create the idea of robbing a bank or burglar a home inside his head. That doesn't make him a criminal. If he actually goes out and does rob a bank or burglar a home then he is a criminal. Same with the guy that has pedophilia thoughts in his mind. Of course people with that kind of mind require psychological help. In other words he needs help not a jail with a warm bed.

"A guy can create the idea of robbing a bank or burglar a home. That doesn't make him a criminal. If he actually goes out and does rob a bank or burglar a home then he is a criminal. Same with a pedophilia. "

You worked this out how? Bank Robbery is in the same vein as Rape. It HAS to be acted or it is non existant.

Paedophila is not the same.

-AC

OMg this thing takes forever to load, i BET IT CHECKS OUT OF MY PC HAS MP3 ON IT, SO THOSE GOVERMENT GUYS CAN GIVE ME A TICKED aranoid:

whats a pedofile?

I go to wi schools

not very bright here

Im not a pedophile

WHAT DOES IT MEAN

This isn't a good analogy.

What has being 'suspect' got to do with it? The definition of burglary is entering part of a building with intent to steal, commit gbh, criminal damage, or rape. The definition of paedophilia isn't anything to do with the law, it's a matter of inclination.

All crimes require a plan. But if the person decides not to go ahead and commit the crime (in other words pull out the last minute) is he still a criminal? No not at all. Of course you cannot discard the posibility of that person trying to commit a crime in the future. But until the person actually commits the crime then that person is indeed a criminal. In order to be a criminal you need to commit a crime.

Now, you explain to me why Paedophilia is different from any other crime that requires planning? All crimes require a plan before committing a crime. How is it different in paedophilia.



Well, maybe burglary was a bad example. Maybe I shoulda have gone with car theft? arson? murder?......

yeah i hate reading

"All crimes require a plan. But if the person decides not to go ahead and commit the crime (in other words pull out the last minute) is he still a criminal? No not at all."

Ok, last time.

Once you have had a sexual attraction to an underaged person, by definition and inclination, acted upon or not, it is an act of paedophila.

"Now, you explain to me why Paedophilia is different from any other crime that requires planning? All crimes require a plan before committing a crime. How is it different in paedophilia."

BECAUSE......it doesn't.....stay with me........it doesn't, HAVE TO.....be ACTED OUT.....in order for the INCLINATION....to hold true.

"Maybe I shoulda have gone with car theft? arson? murder?......"

Intent to steal a car, burn a building or take a life, doesn't commit any of those actual crimes unless acted upon. Paedophila, as stated, is an inclination.

-AC

Paedophilia isn't a crime. It's a state of mind. You become a paedophile at the point of having the thoughts, no crime is necessary. If you are going to debate, at least think through what you are talking about.

My point was to get to that borderline between Pedophile and actually committing the crime of child sexual abuse. But is quite is obvious is not getting there. And is true Pedophile is not a legal category or term. Although the acts pedophiles desire to carry out are criminal in most jurisdictions, they are not legally referred to as pedophilia. But anyways, it was just an observation I was trying to make.

"Although the acts pedophiles desire to carry out are criminal in most jurisdictions, they are not legally referred to as pedophilia. But anyways, it was just an observation I was trying to make."

I understand what you're saying but like, the way you made it seem was "You're not a murderer if you don't murder. Nor are you a paedophile if you don't.....paedoph...". Which isn't the case because as Vic stated, it's a state of mind, not a crime. Paedophilia does not equate to raping a child, it's the thoughts. Once you have them, it is paedophilia.

-AC

and here you go as well

http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/omd?paraphilia

"Paraphilias are a variety of complex psychiatric disorders which are manifest as deviant sexual behaviour. For example, in men the most common forms are pedophilia (sexual behaviour toward children) and exhibitionism (exposing one's body in public setting). Men with paraphilia are usually treated with psychotherapy, antidepression medications, and medications that alter hormones, particularly testosterone (male sex hormone)."

"its a psyciatric disorder, not a normal function of the mind, or a law term. its an attraction to CHILDREN, not someone who happens to be underage. a pattern of behavior, which centers around being turned on by those who are obviously not adults, not children who look like adults. you are just looking for loopholes in a short definition to fit your own theory. its a disorder, thats where the WORD comes from. you cant just change the reality of it."

I'm not trying to change anything. You are changing what I originally meant just to get around what I'm saying.

By definition, thinking about anyone underage, who yes, are legally still children because the dictionary and psychological terms weren't written with dress sense in mind, is an act of paedophila.

Really not that hard to understand.

"Paraphilias are a variety of complex psychiatric disorders which are manifest as deviant sexual behaviour. For example, in men the most common forms are pedophilia (sexual behaviour toward children) and exhibitionism (exposing one's body in public setting). Men with paraphilia are usually treated with psychotherapy, antidepression medications, and medications that alter hormones, particularly testosterone (male sex hormone)."

Yes, I know this. What's your point? It doesn't change the fact that as stated, paedophilia is no physical crime. It's a mind set/state. It need not be acted and by law and definition, since all that's required is thought, the thoughts only need to be directed toward someone underaged who is legally still a child. I'm not saying the court aren't gonna be more lenient if it's a 16-17 year old but it is still applicable.

Stop completely ignoring what I'm saying to you and then accusing me of finding loopholes. WindDancer understood it easy enough which leads me to wonder what exactly is going on here. I understand what you are saying but you obviously don't get me.

-AC

look, im done running around in circles with you.
pedophilia is a medical disorder. you cant 'technically' be one.
thats like saying you can be a 'technical' schizophrenic.
its ludicrous. i can see the idea you present, but the word 'pedophile'
is just not appropriate at all. it makes no sense.

its like you're saying "i meant pedophile...NOT pedophile"

and im not twisting your words. read your own

I think that what is happening here is that we're looking at "pedophile" from different perspectives. I, for one was looking at it from a legal perspective (and made a couple of wrong assumptions). Whereas AC and PVS are looking at it from a medical point. Despite that we all agree that pedophile is psychiatric disorder. So is that good enough or do we have to dwell a little deeper into definintions? I hope not.

as i stated earlier, i think this whole debate has centered around that definition.
its not an annoying catch to the debate, but the heart of it imho

"look, im done running around in circles with you.
pedophilia is a medical disorder. you cant 'technically' be one.
thats like saying you can be a 'technical' schizophrenic.
its ludicrous. i can see the idea you present, but the word 'pedophile'
is just not appropriate at all. it makes no sense.

its like you're saying 'i meant pedophile...NOT pedophile'"

You have obviously made an assumption of what my original point was, or what point I've been making now.

Paedophilia begins when you have the thoughts. That is all...there is....to it. That is all I'm saying. It may be a very small degree of what is CONSIDERED paedophilia, however that is factually where paedophilia begins. In the mind, it does not need to be acted out like rape, arson or murder.

That is fact.

You've been running around in circles on your own, your raise some good points but I've just been going in a straight line right through this debate. I shall continue to because unlike most of the people on this thread, I read what you post and go by what is there. I don't assume.

-AC

Is like I mention before is from what perspective you define the word. Certain words differ in legal terms and in medical terms. I was looking at it from a different view. But I will agree that Pedophilia does begin in the mind of the person. I think that when we refer to incline we should look at the degrees of inclinination. If there are any?

"Paedophilia begins when you have the thoughts. That is all...there is....to it."

psychiatric disorders don't begin with a thought.
its not spontaneous, but a reaction to other factors, be it childhood trauma, chemical imbalance of the brain etc. its not something that is magically spawned out of a thought or technicality.

the thought is the symptom, not the cause

btw are we talking about the condition or an overused incorrect label, both of which share the same word? please lets settle this for good, since this blending of law, morals, and psychiatry are making me dizzy

"its not spontaneous, but a reaction to other factors, be it childhood trauma, chemical imbalance of the brain etc. its not something that is magically spawned out of a technicality.

the thought is the symptom, not the cause

btw are we talking about the condition or an overused incorrect label, both of which share the same word? please lets settle this for good, since this blending of law, morals, and psychiatry are making me dizzy"

The thought is the symptom, not the cause? How silly. The thought is what gives way to a possible act. Seeing as RAPE has to be acted and paedophilia does not, it begins with the thought. It starts in the mind, IN THE MIND. Rape, arson and murder occur when a female is forced intercourse, a property is burned or a life is taken. Paedophilia does not occur when a man/woman lays his hands unlawfully upon an underage child. That is just the physical aspect of carrying out paedophilia. It begins with the will and intent to do that, because that is when it is considered an offence. You don't like the definition but regardless it's there to be used and you can't get around it so you dismiss it.

My point at the very very beginning with ARC was that by SAYING "Just wait till some of those turn 18" he is insinuating that he wants to do things with them now that he cannot do until they are 18. Which would be things of a sexual nature, hence he has sexual thoughts and attractions to an underage citizen. Now I wouldn't EVER put him on the same scale, or anyone who says that, next to a man/woman who molests a child. However, the thought is where it starts even if it goes no further. Paedophiles start by thinking those things too you know.

If you can't handle blending more than one topic, I'll slow down for you. Just had to ask. Forgive me for assuming you could keep up.

-AC

*sigh* ok, and the psychiatry behind it is just a bunch of bullshit i guess.
your right, pedophiles are spontaneous, nothing contributes to such behavior
besides a simple thought out of nowhere. forget all the research connecting pedophilia with childhood trauma among other things. its all hogwash, because you said so. end of story....happy?