Why is the "born this way" argument not viable for pedophiles, necrophioles, zoophiles and so on?

[genericname85]

i don't wanna condone pedophilia, necrophilia and zoophilia at all but i do wanna think about this without any bias or prejudice. so if you find yourself triggered by even thinking of the words mentioned, don't answer this question and go to your local safe-space to seek shelter from uncomfortable thoughts that may come up.

so we keep arguing that peoples sexuality as well as sexual identity and sexual desires are genetic or inherent and not learned, impossible to change and since it's not a personal choice, it's not in the responsibility of the individual, so we have to just accept it right? so we have accepted that being lesbian, bisexual, gay, trans, queer and many more is ok and totally fine.
we have accepted that self identifying as opposite gender, genderless or even something that isn't even human is not only ok but should be accepted by everyone that has no personal experience with this stuff too.
having said that, why is being a pedophile, necrophile and zoophile not ok? Can they change their desire or identity?

i fully understand that children, animals and dead people can not give consent to sexual intercourse and i am against allowing sexual activities involving them but from a logical standpoint, i don't understand completely. i'm just trying to discuss our social norms from the perspective of the individual and ask, why we come to assume that sexuality is not a free will choice, yet we blame pedos for being pedo, necrophiles for being necro and so on as if they could decide to stop that. why can we not have same "acceptance" standards for every sexuality? i'm not saying we should allow them to have sex with children, animals or corpses. i'm just saying: why not accept and stop demonizing their sexual identity?

why have we stopped seeing gender disphoria as a "disorder" or an "illness" when with the same argument we stopped donig that, we would logically have to stop seeing pedophiles, zoophiles or necrophiles as sick or ill?

[TheSpaceGnome]

All forms of attraction to anything period, are the result of a person's genetics, thus no form of attraction is their fault.

Scientifically speaking, pedophilia, necrophilia, zoophilia, and all other forms of sexual attraction to unsafe things, are genetic disorders, because even if you insert morality:
1. Sociopathy is also a genetic disorder.
2. Mental retardation is also a genetic disorder.
And those 2 things are what "evil" is.
Granted those 2 things are actually like thousands of variants, but still.

We don't like to think about it, because we like the convenience of blame, but the worst things imaginable that people have done, they did so because their genetics and environment drove them to be the person that they are, even people as dangerous as adolf hitler.

Free will is a sort of illusion, you get some variance of choice to handle what you are dealt yes, but ultimately we are all victims to how our genes interact with our environments, and even those choices are just your genes talking.

I'm only kind hearted because my genetics allow for that, I'm only attracted to adults because my genetics allow for that, I'm lucky.

Some genetic setups just happen to be dangerous to others even under zero stress situations. Life is a crapshoot.

[genericname85]

i'm not sure if "scientifically speaking" that is true. but assuming it is: why are homosexuality and genderdysphoria not considered "disorders" anymore? or is it just a deluded society of idiots that prefers feel good terminology over the truth?

[TheSpaceGnome]

A genetic disorder is just a genetic combination that inhibits successfully coexisting with society, this can be a genetic disease, but it can also simply be a not tolerated genetic variant that isn't diseased, but is dangerous. In the case of the pedophilia, necrophilia, and zoophilia, they aren't tolerated because they lead to hazardous outcomes, some of which result in diseases, death, mental manipulation, etc. Typically, being gay or thinking you are in the wrong body, do not lead to the harming of others, so it's not disorderly, thus not a disorder, though a time existed when this was thought to be otherwise.

[TheSpaceGnome]

Simply put, it's based off threat assessment as to what people consider a disorderly conduct, and because we like to place blame and get revenge, rather than actually fix problems, people don't want to hear that a person who wants to hump a dog, child, or corpse, is genuinely mentally impaired (because wanting to do those things is literally insane). Because it makes both parties a victim to point that out, and that makes people uncomfortable, and uncertain what to do about the problem. When our dog or cat or toddler does something stupid or dangerous, we feel concern, we tell them no, but we don't cull them, even if it was really bad, because we deem them incapable of the responsibility of assessing dangers or understanding why something is wrong. But when an adult falls short of that capability, we cull them, because we incorrectly assume that physical maturity creates sanity. This really has more to do with how adults are treated than anything else. It makes sense but also doesn't. there are cases where the danger level is so high that self preservation demands that person be removed from society, and there are cases where that measure isn't appropriate, but is done anyway. But in either case, the perp is also the victim, even the sadistic ones, because their genes are why they are sadistic, and it doomed them from ever having a normal life, just like it did their victims. It's quite a distressing topic to think about really, and I, like many others, do not know what could be done to prevent those kinds of minds from being created to begin with.

[hahahmm]

The entire problem is that leftist morality is based on feeling good and thinking that the most important thing is not to hurt someone's feelings. Once one makes feelings the standard then anything goes. It's just a matter of time. You are seeing the fire on the lawn and asking why isn't the house on fire... well just wait long enough, without somebody putting that fire out, and that house will be on fire.

The feel good, good intentions of misguided people is exactly why we see soaring crime rates in many of the biggest blue state cities in the U. S. right now.

[genericname85]

well this is specially tragic, cause by the compulsed political correctness nonsense, you actually murder genuine kindness and virtute. being a good person has no value, if you don't have the option to be a bad person.

[laurieluvsit]

It is an argument now based on a new study.

I just heard yesterday that the study has proven that there is a difference between a child molester and a pedophile.

It said that most pedophiles are born with a gene that makes them such and they can not help themselves, only child molesters can.

I also think this may be a fake study to excuse their behavior.

[genericname85]

really? you need a "study" to know that "child molestation" is different from being a pedophile? to me that was kind of clear just from the word. i mean you can be heterosexual and still never had sex. common sense. no need for a degree to know xD

[genericname85]

i mean when i say i'm heterosexual that doesn't "mean" that i have fucked women. it only means that i like that.

[JC1981]

I understand your prospective, but when it comes down to it, lesbian, bisexual, gay, trans, queer etc aren't hurting anyone. Pedophile, necrophile and zoophile take advantage of the helpless and dead which is horrendously depraved. They know between right and wrong and their disregard for anything but their own need isn't condonable nor exceptable.

[genericname85]

Thanks for trying to have a rasonable discussion. i really appreciate that, as it's not easy around this topic. i mean i understand harming children is not ok. but not every sexual interaction that is theoretically possible with a minor is inherently harmful. and how do you determine that an animal does not consent and is harmed? and who is harmed or hurt in the case of a dead person? i totally agree that it is morbid. i mean less so than thinking you're the opposite gender or liking the same gender sexually but it is all morbid just to different degrees of morbidity so to speak right? and if thinking you're the opposite gender despite of your physical manifestation or if you desire the same gender sexually is NOT morbid at all, then why is wanting sex with children, animals or dead people morbid? like i do have the same feelings about those questions that you probably do have. it just feels wrong. i know we're not supposed to feel that "being gay, lesbian or trans" is wrong but it still feels like that to me and society has taught me to not think of it as "bad". and i don't see why this "not thinking of it as bad" should not apply to thoseother things. keep in mind: there's a difference between saying "being necrophile, pedophile and zoophile is ok" and actually allowing or condoning suchs exual acts. i wanna separate that conceptionally.

[DevinAM]

https://youtu.be/2B_Yw-JAnuw

[awkward_author]

The difference for me is pedophiles, zoophiles and necrophiliacs are committing non-consensual acts when they “act on” their desires. The LGBTQ+ community isn’t harming anyone simply by being themselves. I consider pedophilia, for example, to be a paraphilia, rather than an orientation. People should definitely have the ability to get help without fearing consequences, and it might be positive to approach them with an attempt to understand, rather than automatic condemnation, if they haven’t harmed another person. However, if they do, they should experience the consequences for their actions.

[genericname85]

hey, first of all thank you for giving a rational, non triggered response. this isn't trivial, as most people on here are unable to do this. so i wanna comment on what you said. there's 2 components i tried to address here. first is "allowing of sexual acts", which i completely agree that non consensual sexual acts as you worded it should be and stay forbidden. though maybe "consent" can be redefined. why can a child consent to having candy (even though it doesn't the understand the consequences of eating candy) while not understanding the consequences is the reason we say children can not consent to sex? i mean giving a child candy can be framed as harmful. likewise they can enjoy physical stimulationor tasting candy. so why is one ok but not the other? this is just not so obvious to me. same with animals. why can they not consent to have sex with a human? i mean they experience arousal and sexual pleasure and maybe there's ways to tell whether they wanted it or not? and then why do dead people need to consent? a dead corpse isn't a sentient being. so it's more of a thing that doesn't even need "consent" right? like nobody will stop you from shoving your dick into a frozen turkey right? like you're not asking inanimate objects like dildos or ona-holes for consent to have sex with you right?

[genericname85]

the second aspect is the acceptance of individual desires. independed from the question of "if we should allow such sexual interactions" is the question of "how should we think about someone desiring those thigns? and i feel likewe have come to accept lgbtq+ stuff as "normal and healthy" with reasoning that actually would also apply to necrophilia, pedophilia and zoophilia. so why do we see those 3 as evil but gay, lesbian, bi, trans, queer and so on as "not evil"? i mean at the very least we should actually say that necrophilics, pedos and zoophiles can't help their sexual desires and we should fiond ways in which we can liberate them to live their sexual desires without harming anyone. maybe by allowing the use of animated pornography? I don't know. i'm just saying that we're suppressing their sexual desires and we understand that this feels bad. so can there be a solution that helps them without actually harming someone?

[awkward_author]

Psychologically speaking, children cannot consent to sex like they can to candy and popcorn, for example. Many children who experience statutory rape meet the criteria for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and I am aware other trauma-based disorders exist as well. There’s a lot of other things children cannot consent to because they don’t completely understand them as well. Speaking more on your examples, there are lots of parents who teach their children the values of healthy eating and the impact of food on your health. I think the problem people have with zoophilia is we don’t know for sure if an animal is consenting to sexual activity. Animals are also a different species, so that’s not going to be viewed in a positive light. As for corpses, it’s more about respecting their memory and surviving family members. I, personally, don’t care about necrophilia if you receive consent prior to death and/or the person in charge of the body is fine with it (family/friend/surviving spouse).

[awkward_author]

Regarding your second point, I don’t have a problem with them finding another way as long as it doesn’t harm anyone. I, personally, don’t view them as disgusting human beings. At the same time, I don’t feel sorry for them. They are entitled to help if they want it, and I genuinely hope we can find a way to treat them that will benefit themselves, as well as society. I think people judge them has human beings based on the nature of their attraction because it’s an emotionally charged topic. It’s seen as disgusting, thus the individual is disgusting.

[genericname85]

ok, so it is my undrstanding that "statutory rape" is a legal thing we decided that is supposed to protect children. this is the legal side and this has probably been put into place, cause there's so many problems that can come from this that we don't sufficiently understand and even if we did, we can't control and enforce those things right? so there's very simple and clear cut things like forcing sexual acts on a child that inflicts mental or even physical trauma on them. and of course it is obvious that there's harm in that so this should be forbidden logically, no question about that. though you can have a tickle fight with a child right? you can massage a child or you can even kiss it on their lips or body in non sexual ways. and i do feel very disgusted and creeped out by that thought... but aren't there things that are considered to be sexual in nature that do not actually harm a child pyhsically or mentally? i understand it should still be forbidden, cause we can never find out if that was the case or not but isn't that theoretically possible? i mean if you have sex with a living person, you're not asking their family and friends to have sex with them right? xD you ask them and that's it. so why should family and friends have a say in what happens to the dead body in that way? it's not like anything about the person they knew and that they have fond memories of changes, when things like that happen to a corpse.

[genericname85]

well regarding your second part: "They are entitled to help if they want it, and I genuinely hope we can find a way to treat them that will benefit themselves, as well as society" put "gay or lesbian" in that sentence in a society where gay and lesbian people are shunned, ostracized or even put to jail if they become public about their sexual desires. i mean you say "they are entiteled to help" but can they be helped? it seems gay and trans people can't be helped... so saying there's help is kind of weird to me.

[awkward_author]

Technically speaking, children can experience trauma from what would legally be considered statutory rape. Not that this matters, but I was one of them. Grooming a child and sexually taking advantage of them is not okay, which is quite common with statutory rape. Tickling and massaging aren’t inherently sexual. They can be, but it’s not always that way. Kissing isn’t always sexual either. The level of appropriateness, however, would depend on the body part being kissed. Regarding issues that can arise from statutory rape, there’s a clear definition, and many states make exceptions in certain cases (ex. Romeo and Juliet clause). That’s true. I guess you’d just receive consent while that person is alive then? I really don’t care as long as you didn’t kill the person first.

[genericname85]

i'm sorry to hear that you experienced that. i hope you can cope with it and you can still have a relatively normal sexual development. though i couldn't quite understand. it is considered statutory rape because a child CAN carry trauma from this, not because a child "always gets trauma from this" right? i actually spoke with a female who i think was pedophile on here, who said it's normal in her culture to jerk young boys off to help them sleep better. like she claimed to come from some Asian country and i didn't really believe that this was normal where she lived. but I don't know if there's by default trauma in this. do you think it is?

[awkward_author]

There’s a lot of different kinds of help. Finding a way for them to exist in the world without harming other people is important. Maybe support groups might help to an extent? Having a safe space to talk about things is important, so they don’t have to suppress their feelings. They might even feel less alone. Speaking with a therapist/psychologist about ways to cope might help as well. This would “look different” depending on the person.

[genericname85]

well i totally agree that someone who has this, should get help in living with it without harming anyone... but still. i can empathize by imagining that society forbids having sex with mature women or even just looking at them nude. like i don't know if i could exist like that with any help in the world... i'd probably even consider killing my self to be honest...

[awkward_author]

Based on research I’ve conducted, there, typically, would be. However, I haven’t read anything in-depth about every country, so I wouldn’t know. The way people respond to traumatic events, if they’re perceived as such, does depend, at least to an extent, on genetic predisposition. It’s considered statutory rape because children cannot consent to or fully understand sexual activity. They exist to protect children from predatory adults. I mentioned trauma because I support statutory rape laws, to an extent.

[awkward_author]

If the alternative is getting rid of statutory rape laws and allowing pedophiles to “have sex” with children, how would that be any better? Also, if they’re experiencing suicidal ideation, there’s a hotline for that.

[genericname85]

well the science about sexual topics is really biased, specially if you look at literature that's 10 years old or older. specially in areas that often deals with criminal stuff with rape and all that. i noticed that as i researched the impact of pornography consumption for a scientific paper that i had to hand in at university. so i don't wanna say it's wrong but i would doubt it based on my previous experience with a close topic. you know that many transgender people end up killing themself?`they can not be helped. not even by surgery or adapting a different gender identity. it's tragic. some people can just not be helped... but i think showing sympathy and support on a societal level would at least mae it a little bit better than basically shunning you for what you like sexually, "if" you don't actually act on it in those cases where someone else is harmed.

[awkward_author]

That’s true. Regarding the trans people, there are a lot of issues that cause them to kill themselves after fully or partially transitioning. Different topic altogether, though. Let’s just say, my opinions on certain trans topics aren’t popular. I agree, though, society can help to an extent, but it’s impossible to assist everyone.

[genericname85]

yeah my opinions on that are also not popular just cause i have trouble accepting stuff that isn't logically coherent and i can't accept arguemnts that are based on individual feelings if there's no rational or logical reason.

[genericname85]

and i feel like a LOT of the notions we have about sexuality, specially in the cases that are outside what's currently acceptable are not really based on logic and reason but on vague and unarticulated prejudce and worries about something that is not factually reasearched.

[awkward_author]

I get that. I feel like research has validated trans people to an extent, but I think you need to experience dysphoria to be trans. Regarding sexuality, though, we have a lot of perceptions that are outdated.

[genericname85]

well it has been great to have an open minded conversation :) it's really hard to get that in society generally and also on here :) thanks.

[Deathraider]

It is, but the difference is that pedophiles, necrophiles, and zoophiles don’t have consent and can’t have consent (children can’t consent, nor dead people or animals). People who are part of LGBTQ aren’t hurting anyone or doing anything with them without consent.

[Deathraider]

My view is that we need to find ways to help pedophiles integrate into society while managing these feelings in a way that doesn’t hurt children.

[genericname85]

well you don't need consent for "desiring" sex with children, animals or corpses. just to actually do it. but we harshly judge people for having those desires even though we know it's not even their fault... like why is it so easy to acknowlegde that with lgbtq?

[genericname85]

like shouldn't be more supportive of people who have those desires and NOT act on it rather than just lumping them in with those that actually do act on it?

[Deathraider]

I agree we shouldn’t be judging people based on the desire itself. It’s not something within our control. I think part of the issue as to why people with these desire don’t seek out help is the social stigma that is attached to it.

[Juxtapose]

First of all, pedophilia cannot be a sexuality since kids grow up and such relationships are unsustainable. Also children cannot consent so it is rape, not a sexuality.

Being gay is caused by parts of your brain being more like the opposite sex then your own sex iirc. Being gay, bi or whatever is completely harmless.

[genericname85]

The concept of "sexuality" does not concern Moral correctness or sustainable rationality. It merely concerns what you feel sexually attracted and what you would like to have sex with independent of the reasonable possibility of actually acting on it. Being gay is caused in the brain. Being pedophile is not?

[Juxtapose]

You can't help being straight but you can help the age group you are attracted to. I have learned to spot facial features that indicate someone is underaged and I avoid them. It is not some inescapable thing like being gay where If you deny being gay you will never have any meaningful sex.

[Juxtapose]

Being a murderer is caused by the brain too but we expect people to have the rationality to control those impulses.

[Juxtapose]

But sexuality is on a whole 'nother level.

[genericname85]

dude. being a pedophile doesn't mean you fuck children. it means you find childrens exually attractive. and that is as much unchangeable in the brain as being gay is. being a murderer however is in almost all cases unfortunate circumstances and learned behavior, not genetic inherited behavior.

[genericname85]

nobody is born a murderer but pretty much everyone is born with whatever they like sexually.

[Juxtapose]

Then how come at one point I liked skinny women and then moved on to liking chubby women?

[Juxtapose]

And by the way I disagree with the people here. Liking children sexually even without acting on it is wrong. "I am a non-offending map, I won't hurt kids, you can trust me.." Yeah no. If somebody is really stuck in a situation where they like kids but won't do anything about it, they shouldn't tell anyone they have those desires.

[genericname85]

well how comes never managed to "convert" a single gay person?

[genericname85]

if it's just a "choice" that should be easy right?

[genericname85]

i agree someone who's secretly pedo should never tell anyone, cause they will be shunned... but then again telling someone is involved for getting help... kind of a bad situation.

[Juxtapose]

I view pedophilia like a preference for tall or short people, it is not as cemented in your being as being gay. Age, height and all that is not as powerful or cemented in a person as their preference for biological sex, be it male, female or both.

[DevinAM]

It's not a choice to be attracted to something, what you do about it is.

[genericname85]

yeah we still treat pedos, necrophiles and zoofiles as if they could help that they feel how they feel.