Replies

"And I'm saying that I'm not seeing a similar trend with pedophilia."

And I said before that I think you need to look a little more closely.

"I don't think that removing it from the DSM would give it any credibility of any kind"

It did with homosexual behavior--SSAD.

"if anything, it would reduce the credibility of the DSM"

Every time I've hoped for something like that I've been disappointed.

"I've heard this before. I've not seen any reliable documentation."

I have. As a matter of fact, at the time it was common knowledge in every Psych department of every university in the country.

"First, this discussion is about pedophilia...Pedophilia refers to sexual attraction to prepubescent children."

Okay, fair enough, but a step from 18 to 16 is a step in the direction the pervofascist activists want to go.

"Second, the AoC for heterosexual sex was already at sixteen. English law was just changed so that the AoC for homosexual sex was the same as the AoC for heterosexual sex. If you're going to argue it as a bad thing, do comment on why the AoC for heterosexual sex was already at sixteen."

Matter of fact, the age for buggering a girl was 18, as was the age for buggering a boy. The laws were the same for heterosexual buggery and homosexual buggery.

What this move did, aside from giving SSAD sufferers access to younger victims, was to place homosexual buggery on the same plane as normal sexual behavior.

The law also reflected a judgment that the AOC should be higher for behaviors that are potentially more self-destructive than others. The AOC for whiskey is 21 (depending on the location), for bubble gum there is no prohibition.

Frankly, given the self-destructive and socially corrosive effects of legitimized SSAD, I'd say the AOC for homosexual behavior should be much higher than for normal sexual behavior.

"And why doesn't it? Because you find it "icky" just to think about it?"

Because if it were just consenting adults behind closed doors, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. But keeping it between adults behind closed doors is what the pervofascists call "being in the closet," and that's a bad thing for them. Nothing less than full freedom to rub it in everyone's faces and demand enthusiastic endorsement of their sickness will do for them.

Then, too, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion if SSAD sufferers didn't prey on the young so much.

"Some homosexuals aren't attracted to teens"

Even if true, and I've never seen any indication that it might remotely in anyone's wildest dreams be true, the ones who are attracted to teens are busy enough to take up the slack.

"unless you decide not to mention the bit about some heterosexuals being attracted to teens in order to falsely bias the argument."

Actually, it's introducing it that biases the argument. It's a false equivalence.

Healthy men who find sexually mature teens attractive are far less likely to even consider acting on those desires than SSAD sufferers, for a host of reasons.

My rib eye steak is waiting, so I'll just hit a couple.

Firstly, a person whose sexuality is not disordered is in far better control of himself than a person whose sexuality is disordered.

Secondly, a healthy man is more likely to be dissuaded by the immorality of the act. A typical SSAD sufferer has been committing immoral acts for years and years; he's accustomed to it.

Thirdly, a healthy man is much more likely to be dissaded by the thought of the harm he would do to his victim than a SSAD sufferer, who was himself a victim but has rationalized his own molestation into a postive experience that introduced him to the wonderful "gay" lifestyle. He'd just be doing the boy a favor to bugger him.

And, in fact, the actual numbers bear this out quite well. Although they are only 2 or maybe 3 percent of the population, SSAD sufferers commit somewhere around a third of sex offenses involving underage victims. You do the math.

"Ah, so your argument isn't based on what you know what will happen but rather "what if this happens!""

No, it's based on a rational, informed judgment of what is very likely to happen, based on past experience and an educated analysis.

I qualified my remarks with "if" in recognition of the fact that none of us mortals is omniscient.

Thirdly, a healthy man is much more likely to be dissaded by the thought of the harm he would do to his victim than a SSAD sufferer, who was himself a victim but has rationalized his own molestation into a postive experience that introduced him to the wonderful "gay" lifestyle. He'd just be doing the boy a favor to bugger him.

I don't have a lot of time at the moment, so I'll just address this right now.

Your statement seems to imply a belief that absolutely every homosexual on the planet has, at some point, been sexually molested. I can tell you now that this statement is only made by people who are completely out of touch with reality.

I've seen no evidence to suggest that even a significant majority of homosexuals were molested in their lives. I've certainly not seen evidence that absolutely every single homosexual was a victim of sexual abuse.