fiftysix wrote:I have also listened to a radio program including a woman who ran a program for paedophiles. She had a lot of very interesting things to say. One of which was how the less dangerous paedophiles would discriminate or castigate the more serious pedophiles. How they were offended to be considered in the same group. This is all part of the denial that goes on.
I'm sorry. Are you using the word "pedophile" to describe people with an attraction to children or someone who has made an offense against a child? Frankly, I've never committed a crime against a child and the standardized test for individuals with deviant attractions (who may or may not have offended) that my therapist had me take confirmed what the both of us expected. I'm of a very minimal risk to children. Yeah, it would definitely offend me to be classified among those who've hurt children. It can hardly be called denial. The individual has either committed a crime against another human or he hasn't. In my case, I haven't. With that reasoning, I should not be classified in the same group as those who have acted on their attractions.
fiftysix wrote:Clearly some individuals do hate their natural proclivity and fear it. Some must surely go to great lengths to avoid offending. But this cosy little club you've got going here doesn't seem to fall into either of those categories.
So, let me get this straight. To you, the only decent pedophiles are those who hate themselves and don't associate with anyone who has similar attractions. I have some news for you: I'm a good person and I don't hate myself. I used to hate myself because of people like you, and it took a fair amount of therapy to fix that, but I'm no longer like that. If anything, I'm far more stable than I was. Because I'm more stable, I'm far less likely to do something stupid.
For what it's worth, I do hate my attractions, and if a pill were created that could magically take them away, I'd purchase it in a heartbeat. However, my attractions don't define who I am as a person, and I refuse to hate myself simply because I hate my attractions. I've accepted that I have to live with them, and I've accepted myself as a pedophile. That doesn't mean I
embrace the fact that I like little children a bit too much.
fiftysix wrote:The thing is once you've dealt with your self-hatred (for those who had that problem) and all the other factors that disturb your life, i think you should let go and actually suppress your tendency. Talking about it just keeps it alive and in a group like this, where you no doubt share lots of information privately amongst yourself, well its just a worry. And i see it as something of a threat to children.
Interesting. My therapist has a very different view than you. He says that finding others like myself online has been one of the best things I've done for myself. The ability to talk with others like me has helped me to understand that I'm not alone. These individuals have helped me learn to deal with my attraction in a safe way so that children aren't harmed. They've helped me learn that my attractions don't make me an evil person. They've been there for me when no one else was. They've helped me deal with other completely unrelated issues like anxiety, relationships, insecurity about my weight, insecurity about having been bullied when I was a child, etc. The fact that they're pedophiles doesn't mean that associating with them makes me more likely to act out. Using your logic, recovering alcoholics shouldn't attend Alcoholics Anonymous. A fat person trying to lose weight shouldn't be near another person with the same problem. Clumping together in groups like that means the person is more likely to make the wrong choice. After all, that's what they encourage others to do, right?
Of course, you don't actually think the idea of recovering alcoholics meeting is a bad choice. You probably realize that those who need to lose weight can actually help motivate each other to keep to their diet and exercise regimens. What you don't seem to understand is that pedophiles can have the same effect on each other. You're under the impression that pedophiles, by default, have their moral compasses broken.
fiftysix wrote:So here you go - this is what you asked for. Some dialogue. as to the musician who thinks i can't put forward an argument. I think i demonstrated i can deal with your rationalisations right at the outset in response to simontheo. But i have no interest in a tennis match.
I think I've done a fair job of countering your baseless arguments. As for my "rationalisations" [sic], well, I think rationalizing is a good thing. It involves using rationality. Rationality is truth. The only time it's bad to "rationalize" is when that "rationalization" is done by an individual in denial. I'm not in denial that pedophilia can be harmful. It certainly can be. I'm not in denial that I'm not a bad person. As far as I'm concerned, a person is defined by his or her actions. I've never done anything to seriously hurt anyone; especially not a child. The only person here who seems to be in denial is you. You're the only one here choosing to use preconceived notions over rationality.
I still await a valid argument. Perhaps, you should show me actual research. You know, maybe some data and statistics? How about some studies? It sure doesn't help your case when you base your knowledge of pedophilia on a Hollywood movie starring Kevin Bacon.