are YOU a pedofile?

"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"

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
"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

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

Originally posted by PVS
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

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

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
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.

*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?

"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?"

If you are happy with using that "Pretend to agree with him and make it look like I could have proved him wrong when I couldn't" tactic. Knock yourself out.

I see no reason to be so blatantly and obnoxiously sarcastic in a debate however, when it was going well.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I see no reason to be so blatantly and obnoxiously sarcastic in a debate however, when it was going well.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
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.

howbout i just use the "point out your own blatent hypocracy and sit back" method. that should do nicely 😉

"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."

You were the one who claimed to be getting dizzy. I just answered a request.

-AC

and just so you know, i can handle multiple issues, but the lines between stachetory rape laws and a defined psychiatric condition should be defined, not blurred, as it is the source of all this mixing up of ideas.

Well we just had a multi issue debate that dizzied you apparantly.

-AC

*sigh* i believe we've hit rock bottom 🙄

😑

OMG... you have raised the OTF from the pit of moronation.

"You my dear, are obsessive" Syren said to me.

Why are you coming into every thread that I post in to try and have a pop at me?

We know it aint gonna work. Stop trying.

You're just bitten because all your "toot toot" bs was in vein.

To PVS: I respect what you have been saying on here. You have made this a great thread, we have however reached an apparent point where we have explained all we can about our points. You pretty much agreed with my original point anyway.

-AC

Originally posted by Syren
😑

OMG... you have raised the OTF from the pit of moronation.

'Twas a compliment. Dummy.

I wasn't following you, I have had some input in this thread.

"'Twas a compliment. Dummy."

Hahahaha "dummy".

Never gets old.

-AC