Homosexuality: Chosen or Genetic?

Started by Capt_Fantastic324 pages
Originally posted by Bardock42
No, I thinlk homosexuality is genetic. Well it can probably be influenced by other things as well, but basically genetic. I just don't see why Paedophilia shouldn't be. Now, I am not saying that Paedophilia should be accepted and that it is like Homosexuality...just that it might have similar causes (similar to heterosexuality as well, if I may add that)

So, if pedophilia is a possible genetic condition, then why should it not be accepted in the same fashion as homosexuality?

Originally posted by Atlantis001
If homosexuality is natural, why pedophilia shouldn´t be natural too ?

Pedophilia does not occur in nature, nor is it a sexual orientation.

Pedophilia is a paraphilia or sexual arousal in response to sexual objects or situations which may interfere with the capacity for reciprocal affectionate sexual activity.

Structural pedophilia is learned through behavioral imprinting in which one is exposed to a characteristic of a stimulus during a period of development and learns a preference toward a particular class of non-reciprocal objects or situations.

In other words, pedophilia does not occur in nature, it is a psychosexual disorder, and is learned.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, I am not sure if that's all to it. I don't see why it can't be a genetic preference as well.

I honestly have never heard of anything saying that pedophilia, or any paraphilia for that matter, is genetic.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
So, if pedophilia is a possible genetic condition, then why should it not be accepted in the same fashion as homosexuality?

Are you serious?

A homosexual relationship happens between two people that want it, with pedophilia one of the two is unable to really make the choice... Thats what makes it wrong, if a 7 year old was able to truly comprehend such a relationship like an adult could and the dangers then there would be no harm, seeing as they can't it shouldn't be allowed.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
So, if pedophilia is a possible genetic condition, then why should it not be accepted in the same fashion as homosexuality?

Because it is harmful to society?

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Whob has argued that point for quite a while. I think the most obvious response would be the reason behind such attractions. Power and revenge is typically the motivating factor behind adult on baby sex.

Many experts think it is actually a sexual orientation. I think it is more a moral problem... pedophilia is something that can´t be morally accepted in any way, so no one would "want it to be natural."

In the other hand, homosexuality has too much popularity. Today, people are trying to make it to be morally accepted, no doubt we will see a lot of justifications for it.

Originally posted by Atlantis001
Many experts think it is actually a sexual orientation.

It's the exact opposite actually. Most experts see it as a psychosexual disorder.

Originally posted by Atlantis001
Many experts think it is actually a sexual orientation. I think it is more a moral problem... pedophilia is something that can´t be morally accepted in any way, so no one would "want it to be natural."

In the other hand, homosexuality has too much popularity. Today, people are trying to make it to be morally accepted, no doubt we will see a lot of justifications for it.

I would like for you to provide some links to these "experts" who are making this claim. Please remember to provide links to non-biased websites...i.e. no websites that are funded by baby jesus.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Because it is harmful to society?

Fair enough.

Just one thing. I might add....I think our current definition of paedophilic behaviour is probably off by a good 6 years....so well...that's it.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I would like for you to provide some links to these "experts" who are making this claim. Please remember to provide links to non-biased websites...i.e. no websites that are funded by baby jesus.

I toke that from wikipedia, take a look. For what they have concluded it seems to be a lot of people may have some feelings of sexual arousal in connection with children "one quarter of all men".

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

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
So, if pedophilia is a possible genetic condition, then why should it not be accepted in the same fashion as homosexuality?

Because homosexuality is very accepted today, diferently from pedophilia.

Originally posted by Atlantis001
I toke that from wikipedia, take a look. For what they have concluded it seems to be a lot of people may have some feelings of sexual arousal in connection with children "one quarter of all men".

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

Because homosexuality is very accepted today, diferently from pedophilia.

Well, I think it's not unnatural to feel attracted to what we call girls when they already entered a certain level of maturity....

[edit] This edit is supposed to include what we call boys as well not to discriminate against a)women and b) male homosexuals.

Originally posted by Atlantis001
I toke that from wikipedia, take a look. For what they have concluded it seems to be a lot of people may have some feelings of sexual arousal in connection with children "one quarter of all men".

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

Because homosexuality is very accepted today, diferently from pedophilia.

Wow, did you read the entire article? Beyond Wikipedia being a dubious source for ANY topic, that article is perfectly represented by the sites trademark image. It's a puzzle that's been put together by millions of people's opinions. As I have pointed out in regards to teh site, it is inetentionally vague on absolutes, thus allowing the person using it as a source to glean from it's text what they may. However, I'm cool with that. I just think you should read the entire article and notice the inconsistencies.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Just one thing. I might add....I think our current definition of paedophilic behaviour is probably off by a good 6 years....so well...that's it.

You are very correct in my opinion. The law defines pedophilia as something a little differently than what is seen as pedophilia by its medical counterpart. Even the law lowers the age of consent to 16 in some places.

I don't think it's "wrong" to be attracted to a 16-17 year old girl when she has probably already manifested her adult body.

Psychologists/Psychiatrists/etc generally look at pedophilia as the attraction to prepubescent or slightly more mature kids.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, I think it's not unnatural to feel attracted to what we call girls when they already entered a certain level of maturity....

I agree, in nature there is no unatural thing between lets say... an mature adult, and a young adolescent. In earlier times girls married at 12 years old, and with very old men sometimes.

Originally posted by Atlantis001
I agree, in nature there is no unatural thing between lets say... an mature adult, and a young adolescent. In earlier times girls married at 12 years old, and with very old men sometimes.

That's true in regards to the history of mankind. However, I can't think of one study that has reflected an adult animal trying to mate with another of it's species that is physically immature at that point.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
That's true in regards to the history of mankind. However, I can't think of one study that has reflected an adult animal trying to mate with another of it's species that is physically immature at that point.

Yes, I think that is most probably a genetic defect or at least psychological....not natural.

[edit] Well, to be sexually attracted not to find an aesthetical value in it....

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Wow, did you read the entire article? Beyond Wikipedia being a dubious source for ANY topic, that article is perfectly represented by the sites trademark image. It's a puzzle that's been put together by millions of people's opinions. As I have pointed out in regards to teh site, it is inetentionally vague on absolutes, thus allowing the person using it as a source to glean from it's text what they may. However, I'm cool with that. I just think you should read the entire article and notice the inconsistencies.

Which inconsistency exactly ?

Its just relating facts, and there it is related some studies done that lead some to conclude that it can be a sexual orientation. What I´ve found specially interesting is that in their study of the "extend of occurrence" of pedophilia in society, the results show that 32,5% exhibited sexual arousal to pedophilic stimuli that equaled or exceeded their arousal to the adult stimuli. 32,5% is more than what I expected, it means that a lot of people feel sexual arousal to pedophilic stimuli, and homosexuals are a good part of population too... Is all of them ill, or it is just as natural as homosexuality is ?

Booyakasha!!! I's here wit ma mayn man Whobdamandog. So iz you sayin lak, if you does it in da butty wit yo bellend in a fahn bitches, you iz a homosapien?

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Booyakasha!!! I's here wit ma mayn man Whobdamandog. So iz you sayin lak, if you does it in da butty wit yo bellend in a fahn bitches, you iz a homosapien?

😆