Children can't process sex, what does that mean?

CrackedGirl wrote:Whether you like it or agree with it, this forum is anti sex with children so should this become yet another thread promoting this in some way it will be locked. Also please keep things civil thank you

Cracked

I said before the spirit of the forum should be anti-paedophilia and offence was taken. My belief when I came here (and I found thi forum from an academic article) was that it was those on here are supposed to be "virtuous paedophiles". That is they both admit they have attractions to minors but acknowledge that it is not only wrong, but harmful. I have gotten the impression some members do not believe that. I do not want to talk with pro paedophilia type else I would go onto NMBLA or something. I have come here as a way of taking responsibility for what I did (viewing CP), to try to figure out why I did it, and most importantly, to never find myself in that position again.

If this tread takes a pro-child sex turn then it goes against what I thought this forum was for and I should not be here. And I have nowhere else to go with my troubles at the moment.

CrackedGirl wrote:Whether you like it or agree with it, this forum is anti sex with children so should this become yet another thread promoting this in some way it will be locked. Also please keep things civil thank you

Cracked

The sentiment of a thread is ultimately a democratic issue regardless of the forum in which it appears and the prescriptive purpose set by its arbiters.

CrackedGirl wrote:Whether you like it or agree with it, this forum is anti sex with children so should this become yet another thread promoting this in some way it will be locked. Also please keep things civil thank you

Cracked

It's important in this regard to point out that one could believe (and assert in this thread) that children can 'process sex' and yet not consider sex with children advisable or wish to promote it.

ctithe wrote:

CrackedGirl wrote:Whether you like it or agree with it, this forum is anti sex with children so should this become yet another thread promoting this in some way it will be locked. Also please keep things civil thank you

Cracked

It's important in this regard to point out that one could believe (and assert in this thread) that children can 'process sex' and yet not consider sex with children advisable or wish to promote it.

When you say children can process sex, you're subtly promoting sex with children, ctithe.

ElKahn wrote:

ctithe wrote:

CrackedGirl wrote:Whether you like it or agree with it, this forum is anti sex with children so should this become yet another thread promoting this in some way it will be locked. Also please keep things civil thank you

Cracked

It's important in this regard to point out that one could believe (and assert in this thread) that children can 'process sex' and yet not consider sex with children advisable or wish to promote it.

When you say children can process sex, you're subtly promoting sex with children, ctithe.

I may have ended up here because I have offended. But I was also on the other end. I can tell you that the things I experienced as a child hurt me. Physically they hurt and psychologically they were deeply traumatic. Be under no illusions you can justify sex with children. It does harm. It really does.

ElKahn wrote:

ctithe wrote:

CrackedGirl wrote:Whether you like it or agree with it, this forum is anti sex with children so should this become yet another thread promoting this in some way it will be locked. Also please keep things civil thank you

Cracked

It's important in this regard to point out that one could believe (and assert in this thread) that children can 'process sex' and yet not consider sex with children advisable or wish to promote it.

When you say children can process sex, you're subtly promoting sex with children, ctithe.

I wouldn't be so quick to jump to that conclusion. One could believe that children are capable of 'processing sex' (I'm still not clear what is meant by 'processing' in this formulation) but that the child will end up harmed due to their cultural milieu, and for that reason be vehemently anti. Conversely, one could believe that children are incapable of 'processing sex' but espouse a self-centred, dog-eat-dog philosophy in which anything goes. It's not black-and-white.

cumulusjames wrote:I said before the spirit of the forum should be anti-paedophilia and offence was taken.

CrackedGirl said the forum is anti sex with children, not anti pedophilia.

cumulusjames wrote:My belief when I came here (and I found thi forum from an academic article) was that it was those on here are supposed to be "virtuous paedophiles". That is they both admit they have attractions to minors but acknowledge that it is not only wrong, but harmful. I have gotten the impression some members do not believe that.

In case you didn't know, this is not even a pedophile forum. You must have mistaken this site for virped.

Rinkusu wrote:

cumulusjames wrote:I said before the spirit of the forum should be anti-paedophilia and offence was taken.

CrackedGirl said the forum is anti sex with children, not anti pedophilia.

cumulusjames wrote:My belief when I came here (and I found thi forum from an academic article) was that it was those on here are supposed to be "virtuous paedophiles". That is they both admit they have attractions to minors but acknowledge that it is not only wrong, but harmful. I have gotten the impression some members do not believe that.

In case you didn't know, this is not even a pedophile forum. You must have mistaken this site for virped.

It is a forum where paedophiles are allowed to congregate with the purpose of supporting each other to not offend and to keep a mindfulness that sex with children harms them, which ought to be a damn good incentive not to do it.

I tell you that men had sex with me a a child and it DID hurt me. You mostly ignore that and instead attack me on many occasions. It DID hurt and damage me. I HAVE had a terrible and horrific life as a consequence. If you cannot understand or comprehend the hurt and damage sex with men as a child did to me, then you frankly have no place in humanity.

Furthermore, if anyone plans on coming on the attack that I speak out about childhood damaged, and thinks they are oh so clever that they can dismiss it, then they have cause to bypass the samaritans and do the right thing.

I was a little boy and how dare you argue that it is OK. How dare you.

And some of you talk about girls like my niece like it's run of the mill. How dare you talk about that like it's ok.

ITS NOT OK.

cumulusjames wrote: It is a forum where paedophiles are allowed to congregate with the purpose of supporting each other to not offend and to keep a mindfulness that sex with children harms them, which ought to be a damn good incentive not to do it.

I tell you that men had sex with me a a child and it DID hurt me. You mostly ignore that and instead attack me on many occasions. It DID hurt and damage me. I HAVE had a terrible and horrific life as a consequence. If you cannot understand or comprehend the hurt and damage sex with men as a child did to me, then you frankly have no place in humanity.

Furthermore, if anyone plans on coming on the attack that I speak out about childhood damaged, and thinks they are oh so clever that they can dismiss it, then they have cause to bypass the samaritans and do the right thing.

I was a little boy and how dare you argue that it is OK. How dare you.

And some of you talk about girls like my niece like it's run of the mill. How dare you talk about that like it's ok.

ITS NOT OK.

I have no idea what you're going on about. I have never attacked you.

cumulusjames wrote:It is a forum where paedophiles are allowed to congregate with the purpose of supporting each other to not offend

I was under the impression that this was a forum focused on alleviating psychological suffering, not a virtual neighbourhood watch scheme.

cumulusjames wrote:Furthermore, if anyone plans on coming on the attack that I speak out about childhood damaged, and thinks they are oh so clever that they can dismiss it, then they have cause to bypass the samaritans and do the right thing.

Suggesting that people who disagree with your opinion should commit suicide is hardly civil.

cumulusjames wrote:[...]how dare you argue that it is OK. How dare you.

I didn't see Rinkusu argue that.