psood0nym
Bluelighter
This thread is an edited continuation of the recently closed thread, “Underage.” I don’t necessarily disagree that that was becoming a clusterfuck, but I wanted to continue the part of it I invested in it. (for any interested readers: I thought Cyc and SwimmingDancer also made intriguing contributions to the thread on pages 6 and 7).
What follows is the context of the closed thread that I’m interested in continuing:
What follows is the context of the closed thread that I’m interested in continuing:
I'm still waiting on this answer.LuGoJ said:Anyone remember the thread a mod made a long time ago that was about bestiality? I get the feeling this is going to end the same way.
Lysis said:LOL Yes, yes I do. That...turned...out ......weird. lol
What is sad is that everyone with their creepy fantasies compare it to being gay. "I want to fuck my sister. It's no different than when gays were hated." "I want to fuck 15 year olds. There was one time gays were hated." " I want to fuck horses. It's no different than being gay."
psood0nym's response to Lysis:
Am I correct in thinking that what you’re alluding to here, given the context of this thread, is that what is sad is the failure of those making this analogy to distinguish between the degree of moral justification inherent in supporting the social liberation of homosexuals and that in supporting the social liberation of active pedophiles? If not, what exactly are you saying in the context of this thread? But if so, there is an obvious reinterpretation of this (I would conditionally agree) seemingly sloppy and morally myopic comparison that comes to mind: that which compares the pedophile (as defined by the DSM IV in Swimming Dancer’s post above) who has never, and never plans to, act out their sexual orientation to the homosexual.
What harm has such a pedophile done, and what responsibility do they bear for their sexual orientation? It is chiefly because the answer to both of these questions, when we substitute "homosexual for "pedophile," is “none” that it is believed morally just to back the social liberation of homosexuals, isn’t it? The pedophile who has not acted and never plans to act out their sexual orientation has caused no harm (or if you believe they have what is the nature of this harm?). It is ludicrous to entertain the idea that so many would choose to be pedophiles, and so, as with homosexuals, it’s hard to argue that the typical pedophile bears any responsibility for their sexual orientation, either.
Out of all pedophiles, how many pedophiles are there who fit this "harmless" profile? It seems any guess would be extremely uncertain – it could be few, or it could be that they represent a sizable portion of the human population. But unless you or someone else provides reasons to hold these people in contempt that are anywhere near the weight of the two chief exonerating reasons given above, and for which we should seemingly find these pedophiles extremely tragic figures, then as individuals and as a society what exactly is our justification for denying the comparison of the injustice of their social mistreatment to that historically and still endured by the homosexuals who are our friends, family members, and neighbors?
I ask because you speak of "fantasies," which do not require action, and which such pedophiles as I'm referring to invariably have. Whatever your answer to my very first question at the top of my response, what is your response to the rest of it? (Anybody should feel free to chime in other than Lysis, too. This is an under-discussed area of inquiry and I'm sure it would benefit from other perspectives.)
[As an informal aside: “you desire to do what to kids?” Yeah, ewe, I get it. But whatever, gut level disgust alone is not a reason and unexamined disgust is largely what fuels homophobic behaviors is it not?]
Last edited: