Paedophilia is natural and normal for males + Rant

I'd find it likely that , for lack of a better tern, hebephilia is natural or normal, given that the age of consent is 14 for Spain and Germany, with the former only changing its AoC due to feminist pressures. The first raising of the age of consent in the U.S. was due to feminist activism as well, while gays, actors, artists, psychologists, and philosophers, were against that raising of the AoC.

I wonder if anyone has noticed that feminism and women control the majority party line. Consider the fact that when someone over-age who is male has sex with someone underage, they're a "rapist pedo" who "does it out of boredom or to cause pain", while an overage female who does it is simply "damaged emotionally and trying to fulfill a need". The former gets 8 years, the latter gets a suspended sentence and probation, and then child support from their victim once he ages 4 years up to18 years old. It has to do with the victim of their crime, which is female in the first case, and male in the second case.

The idea behind the radically different approach to social condemnation and legal ramifications is the cultural belief that women (and girls) don't really want sex, and that men (and boys) do, that its normal for one to want to engage in "corrupting activity" of sex, but not the other, that the male is perfectly competent, and a capable agent (in the strictest philosophical sense) for determining that they want to have sex at 13-15, while a female of that age is only ever a victim, no agency, lacking control for themselves.

All of this despite the way feminists laud how "girls mature sooner than boys", which would indicate to any rational mind that boys are actually more at risk from being manipulated and used for sex while underage than girls.


As an aside, take into account that girls are also more highly adapted to social situations and understanding underlying motivations than boys, because they've evolved that way, regardless of what anti-genderists say. Each unit of a species needs something to promote its own survival. Males have physical strength, so what did females get? Only those who know how to get their genes passed on survive, so what did they get from their parents to promote their own genetic survival? A superior method of navigating social situations for their own benefit?

Anyway, the point is that the reason there's so much resistance to the idea of "underage" girls having sexuality or desiring it, is because it's been designed that way by the people who control the public dialogue, these same people deny agency for girls and promote undue agency for boys (as evidenced by 13 year old males not seeing the equal justice of women who are 30 and ######6 them put behind bars for 8+ years, instead the women walk with a suspended sentence), while promoting the idea that girls are better than boys because they develop sooner, emotionally, physically, etc.

If one develops sooner than the others, how come the consequences of choosing to have sex are thought to be much more horrific for them than for others?

We still live in a heavily sexist society, which is why the mention of males, in general, having a sexual attraction to younger females, is met with hate and disgust. It may be rational, it may be natural and reasonable, but it is against the social values, which have been crafted by feminist ideologies. These same ideologies are the ones which see underage males being raped by 30 year old teachers as not a problem, or at least minimized. The same ideology sees these "raped" males forced to pay child support later.

If we really were talking about equality, the same suspended sentencing would exist for 30 year old male teachers who ###$ one of their 13-14 year old female students. Moreso given how people want to claim that females mature sooner than males in all areas. There is no logical consistency to this rhetoric.

For some, this may reinforce the values that it is completely wrong, and that women are simply getting away with lesser sentencing by manipulating the public dialogue and crocodile tears. Demand equal sentencing in that case.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... DZ9mO0aaSA

here's the topical newspaper article.

You'll note that in this newspaper article, all activities are diminished, by the court, by bystanders, by the psychologist (who is a woman), and so on.

"I didn't believe it was abuse, but now I understand it was". See if that would fly if a guy unzipped his fly with an underage female.
"Women [only molest young boys out of their own damage or pain, not for boredom or fun. Only men do that.] The article isn't currently showing properly in my browser, but I remember the gist. Consider what this means for how our society views women's agency vs men's agency, how we view men as inherently demonic and women as inherently angelic. Remember, if a women is a mass murderer, either some man drove her to it through abuse, or coaxed her into it as a tag team duo. Never her fault.

This minimized agency is why underage girls are the "ultimate victim", while underage boys are only vaguely considered a victim at all.

Here's another interesting one.

blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2011/08/ct-babysitters-rape-why-do-women-prey-on-teens.html

You'll notice that most people would immediately react to the idea of "wow lucky young guys, they got to have the fun they wanted". On the other hand, a girl in the same situation isnt lucky, but a horribly traumatized victim who will forever be plagued by nightmares and other boogeymen in her soul and psyche.

It doesn't add up, particularly when we allow two people of the same age to have sex with each other, even if one or ther other party is manipulating them into sex. Apparently, the skin age of the penis is what traumatizes people in some metaphysical sense.

For further interest, Rape is only defined by insertion, so a woman can never be a perpetrator of rape, even if she ###$ an unconscious male who has an erection. It is, at worst, sexual assault, despite the fact that she is having sex with an unwilling participant.

You haven't seen feminists clamoring for equality in rape laws for men and women, have you? Same thing here. Feminists haven't come out decrying these women en masse. Many, including psychologist women, as described above, have come out trying to minimize their behavior.

Tl;dr, the age of consent was raised due to feminists, we live in a culture that is either overly punitive towards males and rejects female agency, or which is overly permissive towards females, which also diminishes female agency, whether they're underage and decide to have sex with someone overage, or whether they're overage and decide to have sex with someone underage.

Remember, in case anyone believes women don't want sex, one of the earliest electrical inventions was the motorized dildo. That sure isn't for guys.

It all explains where the self and other hatred is coming from, with reference to guys who feel #######5 for finding themselves sexually attracted to a 15 year old. It explains the reasons AoC has risen, as well as who is controlling the issues, and thus, who is making guys feel like horrible monsters for even having a sexualized thought which is biologically normal.

It should be most apparent that people use shaming and hate speech to control others. I once knew a gay friend who called a 40-50 year old guy a pedophile for having a sexual relationship with a 20-21 year old guy, despite him being well above the age of consent. I chalk this up to his overt jealousy about the relationship, as well as having these cultural memes in him, which combined to slandering a guy in a legal adult relationship, just because he was upset that the other guy was getting some instead of him. He took the one weak point of the relationship and blew it out of proportion to feel superior to the other person.

This is the same thing feminists have done using Age Of Consent laws, among other political works of anger and vindictiveness.

For a good laugh, listen to this Tom Leykis podcast about age gap related issues, and see if you can find any hypocrisy or other stuff from the above post in it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OtQcF5ig6o

Lifelonglessons wrote:snipped

I don't know about all others, but I assumed the OP meant paedophilia to mean the actual definition of the term rather than the tabloid or public acceptance of it. So my comments were directed with regard to this, and I would hope people kept to the topic. It is highly likely that most adult males will find adolescent females to be sexually attractive, with lessening numbers attracted to those at the younger end of the spectrum. But if we look at prepubescents - those to whom paedophiles are attracted - then I think it is less normal. (*)

The evidence from the past about child marriage and how the young were treated is less important too, since marriages were less likely to have occurred due to attraction but were often about the necessity of being a suitable partner. That is, one who would provide offspring, or as often the case, wealth from the other family. And how those younger were treated in the past is hardly a benchmark as to how we should treat them now. We know more now.

* Please don't bother to bring in any evidence about how many adult males are apparently sexually aroused by images or text concerning young children, since we don't really have answers as to why this is, and it doesn't necessarily imply that many males are latent paedophiles. The simple fact of such things being taboo might account for much of this.

It isn't just that adults are attracted to adolescents, the reverse is true -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens ... truth.html

cop this wrote:

Lifelonglessons wrote:snipped

I don't know about all others, but I assumed the OP meant paedophilia to mean the actual definition of the term rather than the tabloid or public acceptance of it. So my comments were directed with regard to this, and I would hope people kept to the topic. It is highly likely that most adult males will find adolescent females to be sexually attractive, with lessening numbers attracted to those at the younger end of the spectrum. But if we look at prepubescents - those to whom paedophiles are attracted - then I think it is less normal. (*)

The evidence from the past about child marriage and how the young were treated is less important too, since marriages were less likely to have occurred due to attraction but were often about the necessity of being a suitable partner. That is, one who would provide offspring, or as often the case, wealth from the other family. And how those younger were treated in the past is hardly a benchmark as to how we should treat them now. We know more now.

* Please don't bother to bring in any evidence about how many adult males are apparently sexually aroused by images or text concerning young children, since we don't really have answers as to why this is, and it doesn't necessarily imply that many males are latent paedophiles. The simple fact of such things being taboo might account for much of this.

If they feel awful for being attracted to teenage girls, then my post should help them feel normalized. If their offense was for someone just under age of consent willingly having sex with them, then they can feel better about that. I specifically avoided talking about prepubescent attraction because I don't see how it could be normal, since its not a viable mating strategy. Being gay isn't normal, either, since its not a viable mating strategy, and they are a minority within the world community. However, it is largely considered okay by reasonable people, because its two people agreeing to do what they want with each other. For pedophilia, it isn't normal from a mating strategy, and its not between two people who are considered to be "equal enough" to agree to sexual activity.

If we're just talking attraction, it still isn't normal because of the mating strategy issue. http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-28526106

5% is still quite a lot of people in the world, approx 350 million, more than the U.S. population. The percentage drops even lower, in that article, if we maintain "the strictest defintion", so clearly some people want to lump attraction to teens as pedophilia too, otherwise there wouldn't be a change in the numbers for sticking to "the strictest definition".

CumulusJames is right. It happened all the time when I was 20. I had 14-15 year olds showing their tits to me and so on, never did anything because it was def. illegal in my states. Now, as guys get older, high status/power males can still pull 20 yr olds +, and some people who might be teens still can find guys in their 30's attractive, but that could be related either to the general way in which males are prized in our cultures only for what they can put out in terms of financial or home stability, while women are prized only for their looks, or it could have to do with lacking a father figure.

Funny fact, single mother households show much higher rates of earlier physical maturation for young girls. The only reason to develop sooner is to attract a mate sooner.

*

So I just finished reading that article and its eerie. Its everything I've been saying about how we deny sexual agency of young female but overreach for sexual agency of young males, to the point where a young male banging a teacher isnt even seen as a crime by a lot of people, when the opposite situation is seen as reason to have a good old lynching. It just goes back to the sexism or chauvinism in protecting women from other men and from themselves, because they aren't capable of making their own choices and having their own life mistakes.

cumulusjames wrote:It isn't just that adults are attracted to adolescents, the reverse is true -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens ... truth.html

Yeah it's true, I'm a necrophile but among dead people I'm most attracted to older men. I think it's more common than people think....I have two close friends who are attracted to (living) older men, but they're afraid to tell people about it, since people can be pretty judgmental.

cumulusjames wrote:It isn't just that adults are attracted to adolescents, the reverse is true -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens ... truth.html

No doubt many are attracted to older males but that is not what this thread is supposed to be about. It is whether it is normal or natural for adults to be sexually attracted to prepubescents.

-- Sat Aug 15, 2015 12:27 pm --

Lifelonglessons wrote:snipped

I specifically avoided talking about prepubescent attraction because I don't see how it could be normal, since its not a viable mating strategy.

Well, that is all you really needed to say, otherwise you were simply proselytising the argument that many paedophiles will use. Prepubescent attraction IS what paedophilia is all about.

I see too many people blinded by their own sexuality.

To say pedophilia is natural is no big deal. It exists in nature, therefore it must be natural somehow. But attempting to normalize it or better said, justify it should be avoided.

ElKahn wrote:I see too many people blinded by their own sexuality.

To say pedophilia is natural is no big deal. It exists in nature, therefore it must be natural somehow. But attempting to normalize it or better said, justify it should be avoided.

I think the first thing any pedophile wants is to not be persecuted for things they can't control (because their feelings are natural). The only way to go about not getting persecuted is to normalize it in the public's eyes, at least to the point where saying you're a pedophile does not automatically make people want to murder you.

I always compare it to homosexuality (much to the blazing hatred that comparison receives). I just want to get to the point where I can say "Yeah, I'm a pedophile." and have the response be "Oh, that's cool. I didn't know that."

So yeah, nothing wrong with a little normalization.

Also, homosexuality isn't a viable mating strategy either, yet it is considered much closer to "normal" than pedophilia. (I don't think that was your argument, but it saves me time to post it all in one post).

Atma wrote:

ElKahn wrote:I see too many people blinded by their own sexuality.

To say pedophilia is natural is no big deal. It exists in nature, therefore it must be natural somehow. But attempting to normalize it or better said, justify it should be avoided.

I think the first thing any pedophile wants is to not be persecuted for things they can't control (because their feelings are natural). The only way to go about not getting persecuted is to normalize it in the public's eyes, at least to the point where saying you're a pedophile does not automatically make people want to murder you.

I always compare it to homosexuality (much to the blazing hatred that comparison receives). I just want to get to the point where I can say "Yeah, I'm a pedophile." and have the response be "Oh, that's cool. I didn't know that."

So yeah, nothing wrong with a little normalization.

Also, homosexuality isn't a viable mating strategy either, yet it is considered much closer to "normal" than pedophilia. (I don't think that was your argument, but it saves me time to post it all in one post).

The reason why homosexuality is considered totally normal by many people (there are some who think it's unnatural but that's another story) is because it involves attraction to adults, adults who can consent to sex, adults who are fully capable of having sex and understanding it.
I agree nobody should wish death on another human being for things they cannot help including attraction to children. However, I do not agree with people who want to take normalization further so that sex between adults and children will be acceptable in society, but that itself is not pedophilia, but an ideology that is not promoted by all pedophiles, as I can clearly see.

ElKahn wrote:The reason why homosexuality is considered totally normal by many people (there are some who think it's unnatural but that's another story) is because it involves attraction to adults, adults who can consent to sex, adults who are fully capable of having sex and understanding it.
I agree nobody should wish death on another human being for things they cannot help including attraction to children. However, I do not agree with people who want to take normalization further so that sex between adults and children will be acceptable in society, but that itself is not pedophilia, but an ideology that is not promoted by all pedophiles, as I can clearly see.

Right. It's an ideology of pedophiles, but not pedophilia itself, which is what this topic is about. There's several walls of text here that I don't really intend to wade through to see if that's what the main promotion is, but in tune to the original topic of this thread, I think we've agreed that pedophilia is natural, but not "normal".

Again, homosexuality isn't "normal", but it's been normalized enough to where they can be themselves in public. Forgetting the ideologies involved for now, I just want to aim for that level of normalization. I want it to be okay to be me.