Excuse these actions... choice and moral

InTheUK wrote:

samuel77 wrote:No! Paedophilia can't be wrong, because "wrong" implies that one made a decision. A nice paper on the ethics is: http://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/etikk_i_praksis/article/view/1718/1836.

If you want to have this discussion it may be best we take it to another thread, it's not really relevant here. However, I will say that while I accept paedophilla is not a choice anyone freely or consciously makes, I can't believe in any explanation that uses nature of nurture to excuse these actions. We really shouldn't be trying to legitimise this by claiming otherwise. Personally I feel anyone who does is still in denial about the nature of this disease and aspects of their own past.

A common action of virtuous moral defenders is to deny thoughts and explanations that could threaten the high moral ground. Accusing one of "rationalization" is one, while another just forbids the search for explanations, accusing the speaker of seeking to legitimize certain behavior.

I'm on the quest to understand pedophilia. Legal and moral question are irrelevant when looking for reasons and mechanisms at work. The moral questions are best answered by philosophers like Ole Martin Moen (the author of that paper), while legal question are to be decided by lawmaker. All should base their decisions on solid research. If i could contribute to that, i would be happy. I'm planning on writing a blog post, where i put James Cantor's research results in relation to dwindling human instincts and neoteny.

samuel77 wrote:A common action of virtuous moral defenders is to deny thoughts and explanations that could threaten the high moral ground. Accusing one of "rationalization" is one, while another just forbids the search for explanations, accusing the speaker of seeking to legitimize certain behavior.

Thank you for making a new thread, hopefully this will be a very interesting discussion that will give me much to think about.

Firstly, I should say I am in absolutely no position to take any high ground, moral or otherwise. I can't deny that I enjoy looking at images of pubescent boys. The question you are interested in, of course, is why? I have thought a lot about this, my own case, over the last few months and I have some ideas. I may share further into the conversation.

For now, I think it's best I contribute by restating my basic belief. No one is born a paedophile. It may not be something you consciously choose either, but either way its an environmental thing. To me, a paedophile claiming they were just born that way is either hiding from aspects of their past they don't want to confront or looking for ways to legitimise their actions. It's easier to do than to look back in examine what screwed you up to begin with.

I think I can pin point the times in my life that together brought me to were I am now, arrested. I can see that had a different road been taken on pretty much any of those points then in all likelihood I wouldn't have turned to child pornography. I'm not willing to believe that I was born this way and would have turned to these pictures no matter which paths my life turned down.

---
(3 weeks and 5 days since last relapse)

I think a lot of us would like to answer that queston, what makes us the way we are? (as pedophiles) For me I can say I don't know... I can give info. Like it started for me at around 8, I wasn't molested, I didn't have a hard life, but I started noticing girls then, the age never moved up. I questoned whether I was a pedo even while admiting I was for a long time because I was atracted to women my own age and even some older, now that has changed. The age stopped at about 25-30, yet still atracted to 8 yr olds? I know I don't choose the atraction, I wish I did, then I could shut it off. Now that I think of it the later age has been moving back down to younger, damned if i know why. I do enjoy sex with older women, if I can keep it up, which involvs a ton of thinking of things I'd rather not admit to, or getting her to age play..... convincingly...... Its hard to fake it, get nowhere, and be fustrated. I certianly don't choose it.

Pedophilia is a sexual preference for prepubescent children. Like all other sexual preferences, it is not chosen, but develops some time between conception and sexual maturity and may be discovered during sexual experiences. I don't really understand how we can say that something like this is morally wrong. It is simply a predisposition to be sexually aroused by children.

Even if doing sexual things with children is abhorrent as murder, we don't say that having an inclination to think of murder as a desirable action is morally wrong. We think, this person has a problem and we need to help them before they do something they regret. They didn't do anything wrong, but they might. So we need to be nonjudgemental, offer them therapy, and stop anything bad from happening. We need to offer them acceptance, accountability, stability. But that's practically the opposite of what most of the western world does for pedophiles. Instead, we say they're horrible people, they should be punished and cast out, they are evil and don't deserve any help at all. Of course, pedophiles aren't going to come out and say, hey, here I am, hang me. They keep it in the closet.

I'm in therapy. No answers on this question for 8 years. Only possibe thing thats been discussed. There may be a chemicial imballance that started when I started noticing girls, but that don't explain what the age stopped moving up, stopped at 25-30, or has started backing back down again. I dont idealize children, or obsess over them, Just find them atractive. If not born this way give a provable reason that a therpist or meds havn't in 8 years.

samuel77 wrote:

InTheUK wrote:

samuel77 wrote:No! Paedophilia can't be wrong, because "wrong" implies that one made a decision. A nice paper on the ethics is: http://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/etikk_i_praksis/article/view/1718/1836.

If you want to have this discussion it may be best we take it to another thread, it's not really relevant here. However, I will say that while I accept paedophilla is not a choice anyone freely or consciously makes, I can't believe in any explanation that uses nature of nurture to excuse these actions. We really shouldn't be trying to legitimise this by claiming otherwise. Personally I feel anyone who does is still in denial about the nature of this disease and aspects of their own past.

A common action of virtuous moral defenders is to deny thoughts and explanations that could threaten the high moral ground. Accusing one of "rationalization" is one, while another just forbids the search for explanations, accusing the speaker of seeking to legitimize certain behavior.

I'm on the quest to understand pedophilia. Legal and moral question are irrelevant when looking for reasons and mechanisms at work. The moral questions are best answered by philosophers like Ole Martin Moen (the author of that paper), while legal question are to be decided by lawmaker. All should base their decisions on solid research. If i could contribute to that, i would be happy. I'm planning on writing a blog post, where i put James Cantor's research results in relation to dwindling human instincts and neoteny.

Have you read Pedophilia and Adult Child Sex: A Philosophical Analysis by Stephen Kershnar?

My intention was not to discuss the cause of pedophilia, but tactics some use to smoother such a discussion.

Something definitely happened before birth, maybe even before conception. In my opinion it has to do with dwindling human instincts. The mating instinct is not strong enough in pedophiles to fight all obstacles. And there are a lot. Boy have to break out of their normal peer group in order to chase girls. Parents and society are against young people dating. Moreover, low self-esteem or similar makes one refrain from pursuing or following through dating. My take is that the normal heterosexual instinct is somehow ruined in pedophiles. Then something else takes over. And everybody likes children. So far nothing about excusing actions or attempts to legalize them.

But i'm also a pedophile, someone who should not exist. Any explanation for my existence is somehow seen as an attack. The previous paragraph would be seen as a rationalization, finding reasons and explanation for something i'm not supposed to think about. I got it once in therapy and was then accused of shifting blame. Online i have seen the response that one does not want to take responsibility for X, whatever X might be. Accused of making excuses.

samuel77 wrote:My intention was not to discuss the cause of pedophilia, but tactics some use to smoother such a discussion.

What you see as tactics to smoother conversation might be someone else's attempt to understand and come to terms with their infliction. A different point of view should broaden not smoother a discussion

Something definitely happened before birth, maybe even before conception. In my opinion it has to do with dwindling human instincts. The mating instinct is not strong enough in pedophiles to fight all obstacles.

Boy have to break out of their normal peer group in order to chase girls. Parents and society are against young people dating. Moreover, low self-esteem or similar makes one refrain from pursuing or following through dating

These two quotes are at odds with one another. You are suggesting in the first that paedophilia is a genetic trait, which I seriously disagree with.

In the second you go on to describe environmental causes that I not only agree with, but recognise from my own past. I am were I am today because of my isolated passage through puberty.

I got it once in therapy and was then accused of shifting blame. Online i have seen the response that one does not want to take responsibility for X, whatever X might be. Accused of making excuses.

I'm sorry, and no surprises, but I do agree with that - it is shifting blame. At some point you choose to look at that material, understanding the reasons behind what made you make that choice is very important. Blaming genetics is avoiding the real issues.

I was 17-18, curious about my sexuality, discovering homosexuality and wanting to know more. With no other sexual outlets I turned to an early Internet and found pornography. Adult porn showed people older than me. Looking for my own age I found the nude teen pictures in usenet.

So I made the initial decision to look at this stuff because I was gay curious, didn't know it was illegal, didn't know that paedophilia was a thing (a very different world from today), wanted images I could relate to.

What got me at that point when I was 17-18 needs a deeper look into my childhood that involve school bullying, first loves, and moving towns.

What kept me age fixated instead of allowing the porn to mature with me is another question I haven't got to grips with yet. That's the part I don't understand. Why, in my 40's am I still fixated on the images I discovered in my teens?

---
(4 weeks and 1 day since last relapse)

InTheUK wrote:
What kept me age fixated instead of allowing the porn to mature with me is another question I haven't got to grips with yet. That's the part I don't understand. Why, in my 40's am I still fixated on the images I discovered in my teens?

I have never ever heard of anyone who started watching teen porn then moved to mid 20's when they were mid 20's then 40's when they were 40s and so on.

45 year olds are not as attractive as 18 year olds to look at, that is just how it is.

cumulusjames wrote:

InTheUK wrote:
45 year olds are not as attractive as 18 year olds to look at, that is just how it is.

18 year olds I don't have a problem with, its the other end of the teenage years, and maybe a little younger, that bothers me...

Besides, surely I should be happy and able to find someone more age appropriate to spend some quality time with? Something should be sparking an attractions to people closer to my own age by now, surely?

---
(4 weeks and 1 day since last relase.)