Thread: "Why do I like boys?"

Originally Posted by Maeni

I must add to it, then, I do get thrills from being a pedophile, I mean talking to people about it is thrilling, "how will they react", sort of exciting.

But it has also gotten me into sitting around, worrying about how fucked up I might be, and that is honestly not fun.

I still can't say for sure, maybe it's just for the thrills and giggles.
Hopefully. I would like to revert some day and go "Oh haha, I was so stupid back then. Tsk tsk."

This is something you should probably go talk to a therapist about. Don't fool yourself, it is wrong no matter how you look at it. Get some help to put an end to it now before it escalates into something that could really screw up your life. Admitting you have a problem is the fist step, now do something to fix it.

Originally Posted by Carôusoul

<3

But lolicon is illegal in Denmark
While "Erotic Pictures of children" is not.


Which makes absolutely no sense at all. Flawed laws <3
Which holds no place in this thread.

I shall shut up.
And perhaps create a thread, at some point. Meh, I dunno.

Originally Posted by Robot_Butler

This is something you should probably go talk to a therapist about. Don't fool yourself, it is wrong no matter how you look at it. Get some help to put an end to it now before it escalates into something that could really screw up your life. Admitting you have a problem is the fist step, now do something to fix it.

Advice taken, I've found someone in Denmark called "Save the Child" or Red Barnet in danish, they offer telephone help to pedophiles.
Problem is that they are only open like 2 days a week, and I'd rather talk with these while my family is NOT home

I'm a pretty young pedophile, so parents are around, that would be pretty awkward.

Originally Posted by Maeni

But lolicon is illegal in Denmark
While "Erotic Pictures of children" is not.


Which makes absolutely no sense at all. Flawed laws <3
Which holds no place in this thread.

I shall shut up.
And perhaps create a thread, at some point. Meh, I dunno.

plz.


The drama that would ensue.

Well I'm excited just thinking of it.

Maeni, I'd suggest not calling yourself a pedophile, people get a different idea from what you might mean.

I personally think laws against art are ridiculous. A drawn cartoon of a boy, suggestively sexual in Australia, can get you into serious trouble.
I think it's stupid!

Just bear in mind that some art can evoke feelings that may possibly lead to the abuse of another human being. Political art with an intended hateful message can do this. I know it seems wrong to censor any form of art, but there are some social conditions that do have to be considered when it comes down to it. Some societies are more accepting of some forms of art than are others. You know how it goes.

That's not to say that all censored art deserves to be censored, or even most of it, just to make that perfectly clear on where I stand.

Originally Posted by invader_tech

Just bear in mind that some art can evoke feelings that may possibly lead to the abuse of another human being. Political art with an intended hateful message can do this. I know it seems wrong to censor any form of art, but there are some social conditions that do have to be considered when it comes down to it. Some societies are more accepting of some forms of art than are others. You know how it goes.

That's not to say that all censored art deserves to be censored, or even most of it, just to make that perfectly clear on where I stand.

I think it's wrong to censor anything, alas, when one person starts, another person follows. Censoring the censorship, pime taradox.

prime taradactyl

Originally Posted by ClouD

I think it's wrong to censor anything

Messages with racist inclinations?
Hardcore pornography on channels that your children can access?
Blatant lies over the media?

I'm not trying to badger you, I only wanted to make sure that you were in fact serious about not censoring anything, being that it's a very, very broad term.

Censorship is not the correct means to go about that. You can't make a slippery slope argument here because everytime someone goes too far there's public outcry against it and the only reason the FCC exists is because the public demands it. When people lie in journalism usually it's the fact checkers that end up getting censored. The thing is, you have to look at who's doing the censoring, and I'd prefer to know that there's freedom of information and then take it in my own hands to protect my (illegitimate third world) children from watching things I don't think are appropriate.

Originally Posted by invader_tech

Messages with racist inclinations?
Hardcore pornography on channels that your children can access?
Blatant lies over the media?

I'm not trying to badger you, I only wanted to make sure that you were in fact serious about not censoring anything, being that it's a very, very broad term.

People can say what they want, and do what they want.
If children want to view pornography, fine.
People lie blatantly - including you, what is the matter with the media, unless you actually consider it a valuable source of information?
I meant everything, it's all life, and what I said was obviously hypocritical, and I pointed that out.

That anything is censored in the miracle of existence, makes it an attractive perversion.

Originally Posted by ClouD

People can say what they want, and do what they want.
If children want to view pornography, fine.
People lie blatantly - including you, what is the matter with the media, unless you actually consider it a valuable source of information?
I meant everything, it's all life, and what I said was obviously hypocritical, and I pointed that out.

That anything is censored in the miracle of existence, makes it an attractive perversion.

That's fine, just wanted to know your take on the issue. Thank you.

As a society, there are some things we all agree are wrong. Not to say they should be set in stone. As long as we continue to have the freedom to discuss right and wrong, and change our standards, we will maintain our freedom.

Censorship is a similar thing. We need to censor some things. We just need to make sure the system is transparent. We need to stay aware of the censorship, and change our standards when necessary.

Freedom of speech does not mean you are free to say whatever you want. It means you are free to speak for or against the standards and laws we all share.

I for one, as an artist, would prefer all my work be banned in a very public way in order to maintain demand.

Originally Posted by SKA

In general I guess you'll always have more male friends and mates, than female lovers. Cuz love isn't as common as friendship. So I guess many men look at their 5 love relationships with women, of which 3 were problematic and then look at their male 27friends and mates, of which 4 are problematic.. and then draw the conclusion "women suck"

Can't men be with women that are simply "friends"? Does a man's view of women always have to be sexual or romantic?

Originally Posted by Zera

I think it's pretty messed up, because children don't naturally have sexual desire.

Yes they do. I don't condone pedophilia in any way whatsoever, but human beings have a sexual drive starting from the womb itself. Even fetuses masturbate.

Originally Posted by Robot_Butler

As a society, there are some things we all agree are wrong. Not to say they should be set in stone. As long as we continue to have the freedom to discuss right and wrong, and change our standards, we will maintain our freedom.

Kind of like John Locke's philosophy that we should have the freedom to do what we want but also the protection of rules and government. It's wrong to do something that harms others.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

Even fetuses masturbate.

I don't think so, as hormones don't develop until early teens/teens.

Originally Posted by SyluxJr

I don't think so, as hormones don't develop until early teens/teens.

Yeah, I think he or she is confused slightly because males when in the womb can have an erection. However, I may be mistaken.

The following quote was printed in the book The Clitoral Truth by Rebecca Chalker; it originally appeared in a letter in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 175, Sept 1996 page 753.

"We recently observed a female fetus at 32 weeks' gestation touching the vulva with fingers of [her] right hand. The caressing movement was centered primarily on the region of the clitoris. Movements stopped after 30 to 40 seconds, and started again after a few moments. Further, these light touches were repeated and were associated with short, rigid movements of the pelvis and legs. After another break, in addition to this behavior, the fetus contracted the muscles of the trunk and limbs, and the climax, clonicotonic movements [rapid muscle contractions] of the body, followed. Finally she relaxed and rested. We [several doctors and the mother] observed this behavior for about 20 minutes."

This raises the possibility that infant girls, as well as boys, may have some sexual awareness at birth. They may already know what sexual pleasure is and how to obtain it. Is it possible that fetal thumb sucking and masturbation are equally necessary and beneficial to the developing fetus? When an infant girl touches her vulva is she just then becoming aware of it or is she demonstrating what she learned or knew prior to birth? What are the psychological consequences of pushing her hand away? Would we do the same if she were sucking on her thumb? This one obscure record of fetal sexuality challenges our perceptions of human sexuality, if it does not in fact destroy them.

This is what I'm talking about.

Originally Posted by Sandform

Cause.

You're just a little straight boy dipping into the cookie jar. For the entire male homosexual community I say this to you. Get out. We don't want male "bisexuals" slumming it up so they can choose women one day and be like "yeah, when I was younger I experimented."

Almost every gay man I've ever met desired (sexually, if not romantically) straight men above all else, and I've known a lot of gay men. My own evidence says you are far from speaking for he entire male homosexual community.

Originally Posted by Robot_Butler

Censorship is a similar thing. We need to censor some things. We just need to make sure the system is transparent. We need to stay aware of the censorship, and change our standards when necessary.

Why exactly do we need to censor some things? Aren't you just relieving people of the ability to make their own decisions about what it is they wish to be exposed to? Why should the government have any say at all in what I can and cannot look at?

Originally Posted by Robot_Butler

This is something you should probably go talk to a therapist about. Don't fool yourself, it is wrong no matter how you look at it. Get some help to put an end to it now before it escalates into something that could really screw up your life. Admitting you have a problem is the fist step, now do something to fix it.

I'd really like to know exactly why pedophilia is wrong. Also, what makes you think their will be any escalation? Does an attraction to women necessarily escalate towards rape?

Pedophilia is really an extreme cultural faux pas and not a disease at all. Our culture is against being attracted to young people but it is by no means an illness. In reality, it is natural. I think this website presents a clear example of how this is true.

I think what this really stems from is the physical and mental ease with which someone can over power and control a young person, thus making it easier for those with ill intent to take advantage of them. Basically our culture has decided that its so easy to rape a child that anyone showing attraction to children at all must be suspected of possibly wanting to rape one. Being a pedophile is not actually the same as being a rapist though, even though in our culture the words have been associated with each other.

It also shows our cultures opinion on a child's ability to make choices for his or her self. In many cultures, children are believed to make decisions, but in ours you are incapable of deciding anything for yourself until you are 18.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

Yes they do. I don't condone pedophilia in any way whatsoever, but human beings have a sexual drive starting from the womb itself. Even fetuses masturbate.

So, your point is? Because some kids might have a sexual desire, does that make pphilia right? What's your deal?

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

Almost every gay man I've ever met desired (sexually, if not romantically) straight men above all else, and I've known a lot of gay men. My own evidence says you are far from speaking for he entire male homosexual community.

First of all, I wasn't serious, you didn't have to look but two posts down to see that.

Second of all...

I would like to know how you could possibly know what all, or even a majority of all these men wanted. Are you sure you weren't just projecting BS fantasies of your own (that gay men want straight boys SOOO bad. Yeah, straight guys are so enticing. )? Above all else? Being straight was the end all of what they wanted? There was nothing else that these men you speak of sought for more in a partner than them being straight?

Yeah, OK, I believe you. I'm certain you aren't just making stuff up. Or at least you aren't grossly exaggerating your sample.

Originally Posted by Sandform

First of all, I wasn't serious, you didn't have to look but two posts down to see that.

Second of all...

I would like to know how you could possibly know what all, or even a majority of all these men wanted. Are you sure you weren't just projecting BS fantasies of your own (that gay men want straight boys SOOO bad. Yeah, straight guys are so enticing. )? Above all else? Being straight was the end all of what they wanted? There was nothing else that these men you speak of sought for more in a partner than them being straight?

Yeah, OK, I believe you. I'm certain you aren't just making stuff up. Or at least you aren't grossly exaggerating your sample.

Most of them told me. The others I judged based on who they hit on, and whether or not they dressed up like a woman to try to fool straight marines.

Also, I didn't say anything about a partner. I thought I made it clear that I was talking about purely sexual desires.

Originally Posted by Zera

So, your point is? Because some kids might have a sexual desire, does that make pphilia right? What's your deal?

The argument "they have no sexual desires" and "they can't make decisions for themselves" is grossly overused.

They are usually both true, to a degree. But they seem to be used as an attempt to stop the entire discussion...

"THEY HAVE NO SEXUAL DESIRES, YOU'RE HORRIBLE, THREAD OVER!"


I just know that when a child has been sexually abused, it usually destroys their life completely.

That's the argument against abusive pedophilia, IMHO, and not those silly ones about what children can and what they can't.

^^ I agree that the main argument against pedophilia is the psychological damage it causes the children.

And children DO have sexual desires. Most people just don't want to admit it. Because for some perverted reason or another, sexuality is seen as something evil and dirty and children are oh much too pure for it... Christ.

Maeni, how old are you btw?

You really should start a thread. I'm extremely curious about you.

Originally Posted by Mes Tarrant

^^ I agree that the main argument against pedophilia is the psychological damage it causes the children.

And children DO have sexual desires. Most people just don't want to admit it. Because for some perverted reason or another, sexuality is seen as something evil and dirty and children are oh much too pure for it... Christ.

Maeni, how old are you btw?

You really should start a thread. I'm extremely curious about you.

Hehe, pedocurious.