Peadophiles in the House of Commons

Dj_Jestar · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:02

And you've shown nothing to suggest they all offend. You really don't get it, do you? You've made a claim, that I asked for evidence of, to which you supplied a biased report. I've supplied you with the means to see with your own eyes that your statement is false, and now you are demanding evidence from me. Without having given any yourself.

However, I will provide some regardless.

You failed to read the 21 year old's post you quickly dismissed I see. (Now that I am at home I am prepared to search for such materials.)

http://www.psychforums.com/paraphilias/topic77494.html

That's evidence of a non-offending paedophile right there.

Let me guess, you're going to dismiss that.

Ok, what about this site setup purely to aid those who are seeking help? http://virped.org/

Or this alternative: https://www.dont-offend.org/

Or this confession on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/confession/comments/1bwegs/im_a_nonoffending_pedophile_ama/ though granted he wants to work with children which would and does make me nervous.

So, come on then, where's the proof that all paedophiles harm children?

Dj_Jestar · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:03

Sliver said:
The sexual urge is a basic animal urge present in all of us. We satisfy it either through sex or through masturbation. Please don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that there are people who go through life and never explore their sexuality. You might as well say that Sun Eaters are real and they never eat food. Google Sun Eaters if you don't know what I'm talking about.

Are you actually suggesting that those who masturbate are harming others?

You never answered my question earlier. When you masturbate whilst thinking of a particular woman. Do you seek her consent before doing so?

Pudney · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:04

Dj_Jestar said:
And you've shown nothing to suggest they all offend. You really don't get it, do you? You've made a claim, that I asked for evidence of, to which you supplied a biased report. I've supplied you with the means to see with your own eyes that you statement is false, and now you are demanding evidence from me. Without having given any yourself.

However, I will provide some regardless.

You failed to read the 21 year old post you quickly dismissed I see. (Now that I am at home I am prepared to search for such materials.)

http://www.psychforums.com/paraphilias/topic77494.html

That's evidence of a non-offending paedophile right there.

Let me guess, you're going to dismiss that.

Ok, what about this site setup purely to aid those who are seeking help? http://virped.org/

Or this alternative: https://www.dont-offend.org/

Or this confession on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/confession/comments/1bwegs/im_a_nonoffending_pedophile_ama/

So, come on then, where's the proof that all paedophiles harm children?

I think you miss the point where Silver only considers a paedophile to be someone who commits child abuse. Which is bizarre.

I'm not sure why this thread has persisted in trying to explain things to him.

Sliver · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:05

Dj_Jestar said:
So, come on then, where's the proof that all paedophiles harm children?

By viewing child porn they are harming children by proxy. I've already told you this. Your memory seems very selective. You've yet to demonstrate that there are paedophiles who never physically abuse and view child porn online. Do this and we can end this discussion.

Sliver · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:06

Pudney said:
I think you miss the point where Silver only considers a paedophile to be someone who commits child abuse. Which is bizarre.

I'm not sure why this thread has persisted in trying to explain things to him.

So viewing child porn online is not harming children in your opinion ? Why is it a criminal offense then ?

Sliver · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:08

Dj_Jestar said:
Are you actually suggesting that those who masturbate are harming others?

You never answered my question earlier. When you masturbate whilst thinking of a particular woman. Do you seek her consent before doing so?

So your ASSUMPTION, is that some paedophiles masturbate using only their mind and do this their entire life without EVER viewing ANY child porn ? Are you serious ? Please demonstrate to me that this is a fact.

Pudney · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:09

Sliver said:
So viewing child porn line is not harming children in your opinion ? Why is it a criminal offense then ?

Yeaaah. This is why I'm not sure why people are persisting with you. Not. At. All. What I said.

[FnG]magnolia · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:11

IronWarrior said:
You could say it's natural, but blue eyes is a mutation that has been passed down for thousands of years.

Well you could say it does have a harm and is a danger to humanity since the human species needs to reproduce and last time I checked, two men can't make a baby without a women being involded somewhere.

Think of these ideas, let's say we are about to coloniz a other planet which is going to happen soon or later in the future, the criteria and requirements would be for males and females to be in good health and have a healthfully reproduction system and am pretty sure for every male, there be a female counter-part.

I think it's kinda obvious if you are homosexual, you won't be going.

The same idea can be applied to if some great disaster happens to man and only a select number can be saved in shelter, the same criteria and requirements as above would be used to a certen level where the number one requirements is to aim to reproduce as much as we can when it's safe to leave them again.

These ideas are nothing new, there are many flims and tv series's that have touched such subjects to different lenghts.

Yeah, it's a tricky question and not far from thought crime which is slowly becoming a reality.

My personal view is that this is a illness or a defect in how you are wired up and should be cureable at some point.

We already have "design" babies being born, so am sure in some point in the future that peadophilia, homosexuality and other problems like cripples and what not will be nothing but history on someones tablet, screen, projecter, laser screen, something.

Do you apply the same blanket approach to those who watch cartoons of women being raped? Or to those who wear t-shirt designs featuring school children with their panties on display? Who buy and use inflatable pillows of kids? Is this also an 'illness' or a 'defect'?

Dj_Jestar · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:11

Sliver said:
By viewing child porn they are harming children by proxy. I've already told you this. Your memory seems very selective. You've yet to demonstrate that there are paedophiles who never physically abuse and view child porn online. Do this and we can end this discussion.

Lets go back a bit:

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=26576110&postcount=126

I'm selectively remembering? Read my previous post that you even quoted for evidence of paedophiles that don't offend.

You keep harping on about uncontrollable urges. Do you rape all of the women that reject your advances?

Sliver · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:14

Pudney said:
Yeaaah. This is why I'm not sure why people are persisting with you. Not. At. All. What I said.

People are persisting because their argument seems to be that some paedophile never view child porn and never abuse physically. My contention is that this is BS and I've yet to see any evidence of it. All I get is peoples assertions that I'm wrong. Well sorry but your asserted opinion means nothing without evidence to back it up.

Sliver · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:15

Dj_Jestar said:
You keep harping on about uncontrollable urges. Do you rape all of the women that reject your advances?

Yes I rape women all the time. What a stupid question. :rolleyes:

itchy · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:16

It has gone on for millennia paedophilla, it wont change.

Its sick and wrong but that is the nature of the beast a human is am afraid. :mad:

This thing has been a conspiracy theory for many years.

Guess what it turns out true, humm I wonder how many other conspiracy theories will
be found true in the future. :confused:

Dj_Jestar · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:16

Sliver, do you actually listen to/read the stuff you spout?

I don't know why I am asking, to be fair. It's obvious you don't. This very discussion for citation before you copy+paste that again.

You have not provided any evidence at all to back up your assertion that all paedos offend. I have provided evidence that shows not all paedos offend.

IronWarrior · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:17

Sliver said:
So viewing child porn online is not harming children in your opinion ? Why is it a criminal offense then ?

It's not a criminal offense to view them. It's a criminal offense to download and share them.

[FnG]magnolia;26578510 said:
Do you apply the same blanket approach to those who watch cartoons of women being raped? Or to those who wear t-shirt designs featuring school children with their panties on display? Who buy and use inflatable pillows of kids? Is this also an 'illness' or a 'defect'?

Do you understand the differences between what is real and what is not real?

Sliver · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:19

IronWarrior said:
It's not a criminal offense to view them. It's a criminal offense to download and share them.

Let's not get hung up technicalities

asim18 · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:20

Sliver said:
The sexual urge is a basic animal urge present in all of us. We satisfy it either through sex or through masturbation. Please don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that there are people who go through life and never explore their sexuality. You might as well say that Sun Eaters are real and they never eat food. Google Sun Eaters if you don't know what I'm talking about.

Wait a minute here.

I ask you a simple question asking "do you always satisfy ALL your urges?"

and you reply by saying: "Please don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that there are people who go through life and never explore their sexuality."

I don't think you are very intelligent if you think one not satisfying every single one of their urges is the same as one never experiencing sexual release. Nothing personal.

And I'm not insulting your intelligence level. I'm actually very helpful when it comes to enlightening people without making them feel stupid. But if you're going to go all defensive and think my attempt at making a point is just an attack on your intelligence there is no help for you.

Pudney · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:21

Dj_Jestar said:
Do you actually listen to/read the stuff you spout?

I don't know why I am asking, to be fair. It's obvious you don't. This very discussion for citation before you copy+paste that again.

You have not provided any evidence at all to back up your assertion that all paedos offend. I have provided evidence that shows not all paedos offend.

His reasoning is flawed from the start. In his opinion, "in the eyes of the law" all child abusers (which he strictly classifies as paedophiles) are child abusers. You can't be a paedophile in his eyes if you haven't committed a crime. Totally bizarre. Also impossible to argue, as any contrary, including medical evidence, doesn't meet his initial requirement that there is child abuse.

Dj_Jestar · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:23

Pudney said:
His reasoning is flawed from the start. In his opinion, "in the eyes of the law" all child abusers (which he strictly classifies as paedophiles) are child abusers. You can't be a paedophile in his eyes if you haven't committed a crime. Totally bizarre. Also impossible to argue, as any contrary, including medical evidence, doesn't meet his initial requirement that there is child abuse.

This is true. I just can't help myself. It must be one of those uncontrollable urges that I am destined to seek gratification for.

Sliver · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:23

asim18 said:
Wait a minute here.

I ask you a simple question asking "do you always satisfy ALL your urges?"

and you reply by saying: "Please don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that there are people who go through life and never explore their sexuality."

I don't think you are very intelligent if you think one not satisfying all their urges is the same as one never experiencing sexual release. Nothing personal.

I'm not interested in ALL urges. This discussion is about the sexual urge. Your question was largely irrelevant. So I addressed the topic rather than the erroneous baggage that your question had attached to it.

FoxEye · 9 Jul 2014 at 00:24

[FnG]magnolia;26578510 said:
Do you apply the same blanket approach to those who watch cartoons of women being raped? Or to those who wear t-shirt designs featuring school children with their panties on display? Who buy and use inflatable pillows of kids? Is this also an 'illness' or a 'defect'?

IronWarrior said:
Do you understand the differences between what is real and what is not real?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but these days the law doesn't discriminate between real children and drawing/depictions of "children", even if they are not human.

A "reasonable person" only has to be believe that the drawing depicts a minor for an offense to have been committed (the depiction has to be of a sexual nature).

This means that drawings of alien children from the Star Wars universe would be a criminal offense, under current UK law.

Not sure that a case has ever gone to court *purely* over such drawings, however.