The Golden Rule my friend:
GoldenPaladin comes in to say:
Treat others the way you want to be treated.
Get it GOLDEN rule? Eh? No? Okay...
Respect is a two way deal. Being mean to them doesn't help your cause, and vice versa.
The Golden Rule my friend:
GoldenPaladin comes in to say:
Treat others the way you want to be treated.
Get it GOLDEN rule? Eh? No? Okay...
Respect is a two way deal. Being mean to them doesn't help your cause, and vice versa.
...try to remember the worst, cruellest bullying you've ever gotten. Then, try to imagine how much worse it would have been if you were gay.
A lot of people had it bad in school, homosexual/lesbian people are not excluded from this.
On the forum though, making accusations without specifying names puts everyone on trial. I haven't read every comment in this thread, but I don't think anyone here has said those things to you. If they have, well, that's still just a select group of people. Be snarky in your replies to them specifically, not to the forum as a whole.
But they aren't following the golden rule far more dramatically than me.
Yes, I used passive aggressive language. No, I wouldn't be that … morehappy if it was used against me.
But they said that I'm disgusting and in two cases that I should be killed. And I think they'd be far more unhappy if I were to call them that.
It needs to start somewhere. You've said you think all people who are against homosexualism are homophobes. They've called you disgusting. What's happened here is generalization on both sides. I'm sure someone here would be nice who has just entered the conversation, but because of your generalizations, they are insulted and won't talk. The same example can be applied with a supporter of homosexualism, like yourself and them being generalized as disgusting. They won't talk either. But some people, some people are different. Generalizing everyone without their reasons hurts them and your cause.
I'm gonna to use myself as an example. I am not exactly a 'supporter' of homosexuality, and I'm already labeled as a homophobe. And any desire to calmly debate is gone. Vice Versa if I was supporter of homosexuality.
My point is ANY GENERALIZATION OF ANY KIND is wrong. Whether it be everyone who isn't a supporter of homosexualism is a homophobe, to that anyone is racist is a monster, to that all men are rapists. If someone, and that someone could be you, show that not of one of everything is the same, changes can be made.
But they aren't following the golden rule far more dramatically than me.
Yes, I used passive aggressive language. No, I wouldn't be that … morehappy if it was used against me.
But they said that I'm disgusting and in two cases that I should be killed. And I think they'd be far more unhappy if I were to call them that.
...Nobody here has said you were disgusting because of your sexuality, nor have I seen any death threats towards you or anyone else for their sexuality on the forums. If that is actually happening then that is terrible and inexcusable. But lashing out at everyone because a select few are being assholes isn't going to help you or anyone else for that matter.
I have little desire to be nice to people who think I'm disgusting.
Perhaps I'd restrain myself if people hadn't threatened my death on this forum in part due to my sexuality.
I want to firstly apologise for my language and tonation. Yes, I could have phrased my views in a less confrontational manner. I understand that lots of you were offended by this, and that's not a good thing. I had just discovered the video when I posted this thread, and was in fits of tears because it reminded me of a particularly bad experience I had with LGBT bullying which I shall not be going into. This emotion does not excuse my words, but does I hope give insight into their origin. In the future I shall wait until I have calmed down before posting similar threads.
However, while my emotion clouded my argument, I stand by the fundamentals of what I have been saying. I hope now to more clearly elucidate my views.
Saying 'I think homosexuals are disgusting' is homophobia by its dictionary definition, and there's no way of getting around that.
I also do not think the opinions of bigots should be 'respected' (whatever that word technically means). Saying that someone who is black is inferior with regard to their race is not a respectable opinion, saying someone who is female is incapable with regard to their sex is not a respectable opinion, saying someone who is lesbian is disgusting with regard to her sexuality is not a respectable opinion.
There also seems to be a clash of ideals here. Homosexulaity and homophobia are not the same thing, much like race and racism. That is to say, disliking someone because they ARE something is bad in a way that disliking someone because they THINK something is not.
For example:
If a person is born without legs, disliking them purely because they lack legs is horrible.
If a person believes that it is okay to rob people, disliking them purely because they rob people is acceptable, if occasionally not compassionate.
Now, why is disliking them purely because they lack legs horrible? Because them lacking legs isn't up to them.
Hence why disliking someone for their race, which they also can't control, is horrible. Hence disliking someone for their sexulaity, which they can't control (evidence: here, here, here, here, and [here](http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26572-study-of-hundreds-of-male-twins-zeroes-in-on-gay-genes.html#.VJpCkV4gAp "Title". There is still debate, as the articles linked show, over whether homosexuality is something you are born with or something that you develop in normal growth as a child: this is however irrelevant, as regardless of whether it is born or gained, it is not chosen).
Not to mention that it's illogical that people would choose to be gay: there are literally no advantages to it over heterosexuality.
Now some people think that the act of gay sex itself is wrong and that when they say 'homosexuality is disgusting' they really mean 'homosexuality isn't disgusting but homosexual sex is'. This theory, despite the definitial dissonance, has an issue when used by non-religious people.
The only non-religious argument I've seen for the specific act of homosexual sex being wrong is that the organs weren't designed for that. I surely don't need to explain how that is flawed: I would imagine that these people use their hands and mouths during coitus, neither of which are designed for sexual intercourse.
Religious arguments are more difficult and certainly more personal, but they begin to unravel when we look at other things which are forbidden in, say, the Bible, that they do not themselves adhere to.
Such as wearing clothing of more than one fabric and having a field with more than one plant growing on it.
'Thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed; neither shall a garment of mingled linen and woolen come upon thee' - Leviticus 19:19.
Now, I'm no expert on the inner-workings of America's clothing industry. but I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of people using Leviticus as a reason why homosexual sex is a negative thing wear clothes that have more than one fabric in them.
(while we're on the Good Book, it also says, as one of it's best messages, 'Judge not lest ye be judged' - Matthew 7:1, which is strange considering that telling us our lives are sinful and that we must repent is very much judging us as only God should).
This hasn't come up before, but I feel it might be worth people noting that I am a Christian myself: I simply do not believe the Bible is wholly accurate, nor literal, particularly with regard to the Old Testament. Jesus' teachings mean a lot to me personally, so I hope people don't view me as 'Christian bashing' - my point is merely that if you use such passages as reasons why homosexuals are sinful, then you are almost certainly just as sinful, and thus hypocritical.
Thus, arguments that homosexuality is a choice are flawed and shown to be incorrect by science, and arguments that homosexual sex specifically is bad are shown to be wrong either by science or by pointing out inconsistencies with the beliefs of those who believe it is hated by god.
Also notable is the fact that the idea that homosexuality can be cured by going to bible camps and by undergoing psychotherapy is very much doing more harm than good: children undergoing these pressures from their family are far more likely to kill themselves than to change their sexuality, which hasn't even been shown to be scientifically possible, let alone spiritually so. Hence even if you may think that curing homosexuality is desirable, know that advocating it right now with the current methods available is far more likely to destroy someone than to help them.
I shall respect your views in as much as acknowledge that you're entitled to have them, but that does not require me to agree with them, nor to approve of them, nor to try to convince you otherwise, as indeed the people who say homosexulaity is wrong try to convince me to change myself (although, again, sexuality cannot be changed, so this seems rather fruitless. Perhaps it simply means I should never engage in sex with a male, and I'm free to fantasise about whatever I want in my head. I'm unclear as to what they actually want to happen to homosexuals, actually, if someone could clarify what they hope to achieve I'd be grateful.
(Also I would like to raise the point that saying 'just don't care what people think' is going to lead nowhere good, especially as people were extremely angry at me when I tried showing them the apathy they supposedly wanted for their opinions).
Thank you for the comments made by both LGBT allies and those who are not, and I hope the discussion can continue more fruitfully from henceforth.
If there're racist people on the internet, why not try to change their views? You might just make a difference, and any progress against racism/whatever other kind of bigotry, even if its small, is at least progress. I know I have made a difference with at least 7 people by discussing the issue with them.
...Nobody here has said you were disgusting because of your sexuality, nor have I seen any death threats towards you or anyone else for thei… morer sexuality on the forums. If that is actually happening then that is terrible and inexcusable. But lashing out at everyone because a select few are being assholes isn't going to help you or anyone else for that matter.
I don't understand why whenever sexual discrimination is brought up, it almost always exclusively involves the LGBT community. What about the zoophilic community? What about the pedophilic community?
I'm not here to argue about the legality of pedophilia or zoophilia. However there's just as much evidence to suggest that zoophilia and pedophilia are as natural as homosexuality e.g. they can be observed in animals, there's no cure etc.
Regardless of whether zoophilia and pedophilia are legal or not, that doesn't change the fact that some people seem to be born with it. These people have to hide themselves and resist their urges (sometimes for their entire life). At least homosexuals can embrace the massive support they're getting from mainstream media nowadays. The zoophilic and pedophilic community are constantly being demonised by media today. The media makes it sound like all pedophiles are rapists. That's false. Many pedophiles are attracted to children but are able to practice self-control and resist their urges. However this kind of stuff never makes it into media. Same case for the zoophiles.
I know there's still a long way to go for the LGBT community but I think that if you're a member of the LGBT community you should be greatful for all the progress that has already been made for your community. Trust me, you have no idea how difficult it is to be born a zoophile or a pedophile.
Hello everyone.
I want to firstly apologise for my language and tonation. Yes, I could have phrased my views in a less confrontational ma… morenner. I understand that lots of you were offended by this, and that's not a good thing. I had just discovered the video when I posted this thread, and was in fits of tears because it reminded me of a particularly bad experience I had with LGBT bullying which I shall not be going into. This emotion does not excuse my words, but does I hope give insight into their origin. In the future I shall wait until I have calmed down before posting similar threads.
However, while my emotion clouded my argument, I stand by the fundamentals of what I have been saying. I hope now to more clearly elucidate my views.
Saying 'I think homosexuals are disgusting' is homophobia by its dictionary definition, and there's no way of getting around that.
I also do not think the opinions of bigots should be 'respected' (wha… [view original content]
You know what's interesting about Walt's and Matthew's relationship in TWD S2, is not only was it a homosexual relationship but it was in some ways, a pedophilia relationship as well, at least to me, Walter looks like he's in his early 40s or mid 30s and Matthew looks like he's in his 20s, so I guess an okay start when it comes pedophilia in fiction, though to be honest in real life, I don't have much respect for pedophiles who want to fuck a 4 or 10-year old.
I don't understand why whenever sexual discrimination is brought up, it almost always exclusively involves the LGBT community. What about th… moree zoophilic community? What about the pedophilic community?
I'm not here to argue about the legality of pedophilia or zoophilia. However there's just as much evidence to suggest that zoophilia and pedophilia are as natural as homosexuality e.g. they can be observed in animals, there's no cure etc.
Regardless of whether zoophilia and pedophilia are legal or not, that doesn't change the fact that some people seem to be born with it. These people have to hide themselves and resist their urges (sometimes for their entire life). At least homosexuals can embrace the massive support they're getting from mainstream media nowadays. The zoophilic and pedophilic community are constantly being demonised by media today. The media makes it sound like all pedophiles are rapists. That's false. Many pedophiles are a… [view original content]
I'm sorry that has happened to you. But it still doesn't give you a free pass to overgeneralize a large group of people in an antagonistic fashion just because of some immature assholes. Everyone is going to be treated unfairly at one point in life, that is no excuse to treat others unfairly.
Someone on the first page said that it's disgusting. They got 4 likes, and their comment was later deleted by the mods, and their creator ba… morenned.
Earlier in the year there were two threads asking for me to be put to death, including slurs such as 'faggot' and 'cocksucking pervert'.
A homophobe is someone who either dislikes homosexuals (just for being homosexual), fears homosexuals, or carries out some form of prejudice against homosexuals. One can be against homosexuality and yet carry no dislike of homosexual individuals, carry no fear of homosexuals, and hold no prejudice against homosexuals. Placing the homophobe label upon anyone carrying an opposing opinion to your own on this matter is kind of unreasonable.
The Golden Rule my friend:
GoldenPaladin comes in to say:
Treat others the way you want to be treated.
Get it GOLDEN rule? Eh? No? Okay...
Respect is a two way deal. Being mean to them doesn't help your cause, and vice versa.
I'll admit that I didn't watch all the way to the very end of the video, so I didn't catch the box burning (I stopped at the point that they were dragging the guy into the forest) . This doesn't change the fact that the mob in the video was clearly malicious, and you are comparing that to people who disagree with homosexuality in general, which is unfair. Anyway though, I see what you're saying with the box symbolism, and that is fair. However, I'll say once again: "I'm not sure if you're legitimately looking to debate over the acceptance of homosexuality or looking to ask people to just conform to your opinion because anything that doesn't coincide with yours makes you feel bad. I suppose that I should clarify that I am by no means content with you feeling bad, but such a thing by itself is not going to be enough to cause someone to change what they believe to be right. People can disagree with your opinion on this matter and still not think any less of you as a person. I for one would treat you no differently than I would any other person in the world."
Saying 'homosexuality is disgusting' is hateful toward homosexuals, as it leads to thinking that homosexuals are disgusting with relation to their sexuality.
I agree with you in the fact that saying such a thing is not okay.
The video is symbolism.
The people chasing people are equivalent to people saying that their love is invalid. The box they burn is repres… moreentative of their love.
That is the point of the video. That's why at the end the box is burned and not the man.
Saying 'homosexuality is disgusting' is hateful toward homosexuals, as it leads to thinking that homosexuals are disgusting with relation to their sexuality.
Not being equal in what sense exactly? Where is the difference in equality expressed in the general idea of disagreement with homosexuality? People against homosexuality are not necessarily of the mind that homosexuals are not their equals.
I don't understand why whenever sexual discrimination is brought up, it almost always exclusively involves the LGBT community. What about th… moree zoophilic community? What about the pedophilic community?
I'm not here to argue about the legality of pedophilia or zoophilia. However there's just as much evidence to suggest that zoophilia and pedophilia are as natural as homosexuality e.g. they can be observed in animals, there's no cure etc.
Regardless of whether zoophilia and pedophilia are legal or not, that doesn't change the fact that some people seem to be born with it. These people have to hide themselves and resist their urges (sometimes for their entire life). At least homosexuals can embrace the massive support they're getting from mainstream media nowadays. The zoophilic and pedophilic community are constantly being demonised by media today. The media makes it sound like all pedophiles are rapists. That's false. Many pedophiles are a… [view original content]
Pedophila means people who like to have sex with children, pre-teens to be exact, there's a different term for people who like teenagers but I forgot what it was and I don't feel like looking it up, anyway it doesn't matter, Matthew looks like he's somewhere in his mid-20s and therefore an adult, unless they were together for more than half a decade it's unlikely the relationship started when Matthew was underaged, so it's very unlikely that the relationship was ever illegal and much less pedophilic, I find it a bit weird when people with such big age gaps are together but there's nothing really wrong with something like that, for example I'm 23 and I would l have a massive crush on Daniel Craig who is just a couple of years younger than my father, I don't really think it's weird for older people to like 20 year olds either since people are generally at their most atractive around their 20s, the thing that mostly baffles me about such relationships is finding stuff to talk about with someone who is so much older than you but if I got things right Walter was Matthew's teacher at University I think, which if the relationship started at that time it's really unprofessional of Walter but whatever, anyway they seemed to have similar interests.
And while wanting to have sex is twisted and definitely something bad it probably should be condemned a bit less and perhaps try to offer psychological help for pedophiles instead of just telling them they are bad, of course I'm referring specifically to pedophiles that don't act on their instincts as the ones that do should obviously just be sent to jail, as doing stuff like that is pretty much rape regardless of what the abuser and the victim say, anyway there's a movie called "Little Children" that I think handles the topic really well, it's not it's main plot-line but it has more than one story as it's one of those movies that is about interconnected stories and you get to see various character's perspectives and I thought the character who was a pedophile was really interesting and despite the fact that I hate pedophiles to the point where I've punched people that were only mentioning it as a joke I didn't really hate that character I didn't like him but I kinda felt sorry for him.
Anyway I don't know where I'm going with this so I'll just stop.
You know what's interesting about Walt's and Matthew's relationship in TWD S2, is not only was it a homosexual relationship but it was in so… moreme ways, a pedophilia relationship as well, at least to me, Walter looks like he's in his early 40s or mid 30s and Matthew looks like he's in his 20s, so I guess an okay start when it comes pedophilia in fiction, though to be honest in real life, I don't have much respect for pedophiles who want to fuck a 4 or 10-year old.
This is completely fucking disgusting.
Homosexuality is between two consenting adults.
Animals and children can't consent by definitio… moren.
Is this an honest comparison, or are you just trying to rile people up.
Also J-Master, a relationship with someone in his 20 year old is NOT pedophillia.
I don't understand why whenever sexual discrimination is brought up, it almost always exclusively involves the LGBT community. What about th… moree zoophilic community? What about the pedophilic community?
I'm not here to argue about the legality of pedophilia or zoophilia. However there's just as much evidence to suggest that zoophilia and pedophilia are as natural as homosexuality e.g. they can be observed in animals, there's no cure etc.
Regardless of whether zoophilia and pedophilia are legal or not, that doesn't change the fact that some people seem to be born with it. These people have to hide themselves and resist their urges (sometimes for their entire life). At least homosexuals can embrace the massive support they're getting from mainstream media nowadays. The zoophilic and pedophilic community are constantly being demonised by media today. The media makes it sound like all pedophiles are rapists. That's false. Many pedophiles are a… [view original content]
The idea that humans cannot have sexual relations with an animal because the animal cannot give consent is laughable. Did you ask an animal for consent before you killed it and ate it? Did you ask an animal for consent before you locked it up in a cage for your own amusement? Did you ask an animal for consent before you killed it and turned it into your comfortable fur coat?
Don't say you need to kill animals for a healthy diet. PETA has proven time and time again that human beings are perfectly capable of being healthy without consuming meat.
Above all this, I already made it clear in my original post that I was not here to argue the legality of pedophilia or zoophilia. My premise was that current scientific research indicates that they are just as natural as homosexuality. Thus indiscriminately demonising both zoophiles and pedophiles constitutes sexual discrimination. Sexual discrimination that's worse than anything the LGBT community is facing atm.
This is completely fucking disgusting.
Homosexuality is between two consenting adults.
Animals and children can't consent by definitio… moren.
Is this an honest comparison, or are you just trying to rile people up.
Also J-Master, a relationship with someone in his 20 year old is NOT pedophillia.
I didn't bring legality into question, I brought ethics into it. Pedophillia is rape. Of children.
This isn't fucking quibbling over the legality of marijuana here. Are you going to argue about the persecution of murderers as well? If we're leaving all ethical and legal concerns at the door?
The idea that humans cannot have sexual relations with an animal because the animal cannot give consent is laughable. Did you ask an animal … morefor consent before you killed it and ate it? Did you ask an animal for consent before you locked it up in a cage for your own amusement? Did you ask an animal for consent before you killed it and turned it into your comfortable fur coat?
Don't say you need to kill animals for a healthy diet. PETA has proven time and time again that human beings are perfectly capable of being healthy without consuming meat.
Above all this, I already made it clear in my original post that I was not here to argue the legality of pedophilia or zoophilia. My premise was that current scientific research indicates that they are just as natural as homosexuality. Thus indiscriminately demonising both zoophiles and pedophiles constitutes sexual discrimination. Sexual discrimination that's worse than anything the LGBT community is facing atm.
I didn't bring legality into question, I brought ethics into it. Pedophillia is rape. Of children.
This isn't fucking quibbling over th… moree legality of marijuana here. Are you going to argue about the persecution of murderers as well? If we're leaving all ethical and legal concerns at the door?
And second of all, even if you don't assault a child, just simply searching for images of children like that, helps an underground industry of abuse. Those pictures come from somewhere.
Yes people with those urges who come forward for help should be helped. But that doesn't mean pedophillia shouldn't be condemned. The reason we would be giving them help is so they are less likely to hurt someone. It is not the equivalent of homosexuality, and the comparison to it is distasteful to be putting it extremely mildly.
Yeah, and they're wrong.
homosexuality is between two consenting adults.
And second of all, even if you don't assault a child, just si… moremply searching for images of children like that, helps an underground industry of abuse. Those pictures come from somewhere.
Yes people with those urges who come forward for help should be helped. But that doesn't mean pedophillia shouldn't be condemned. The reason we would be giving them help is so they are less likely to hurt someone. It is not the equivalent of homosexuality, and the comparison to it is distasteful to be putting it extremely mildly.
You're free to exit the discussion if it makes you uncomfortable, but don't play the 'agree to disagree' card when you have come at me with
… more
And for some people it is equally disguisting as homosexuality.
As fuel for your argument. You are not the peacemaker here.
However current scientific research suggests that people are born as pedophiles. Thus they should not be indiscriminately condemned because nobody gets to choose how they're born.
Since we're bringing ethics into this, I have to question why you're discriminating an entire group for the misdeeds of some. It's like condemning all homosexual just because a man raped another man. Human beings sure are hypocritical creatures.
I didn't bring legality into question, I brought ethics into it. Pedophillia is rape. Of children.
This isn't fucking quibbling over th… moree legality of marijuana here. Are you going to argue about the persecution of murderers as well? If we're leaving all ethical and legal concerns at the door?
There is no scientific consensus on what causes pedophilia.
But even if I grant you what you're saying, being predisposed to find children sexually attractive is not the same as finding your own gender sexually attractive.
Pedophiles do not have partners, they have victims.
If you have these urges and seek help, you deserve help.
If you have these urges and do not seek help, you are a danger to yourself and others.
False equivalence.
Nobody is born a murderer.
However current scientific research suggests that people are born as pedophiles. Thus th… moreey should not be indiscriminately condemned because nobody gets to choose how they're born.
Since we're bringing ethics into this, I have to question why you're discriminating an entire group for the misdeeds of some. It's like condemning all homosexual just because a man raped another man. Human beings sure are hypocritical creatures.
I never understood gay people. Take for example a gay man. He sees a beautiful woman with a great body talking to an ordirnary man and he thinks how the man is hot. I feel sorry for them instead of hating them. And people don't really support gays because they think it's right. They support them because everyone else does and they just tag along.
And if this means that people will hate me for it I'm sorry. I'm sorry because of you, not me.
There is no scientific consensus on what causes pedophilia.
But even if I grant you what you're saying, being predisposed to find childre… moren sexually attractive is not the same as finding your own gender sexually attractive.
Pedophiles do not have partners, they have victims.
If you have these urges and seek help, you deserve help.
If you have these urges and do not seek help, you are a danger to yourself and others.
Current scientific research reports that pedophilia is probably caused by an atypical wiring in the brain. This is a good interview by James Cantor, Ph.D., an international expert on pedophilia:
There are a couple of lines here that I think you should pay particular attention to:
Thinking of pedophilia as an innate characteristic that a person did not choose and cannot change can go a very long way in helping society come to a rational response to the problem—one that can help prevent molestation of children.
We have not yet found a way to convert pedophiles into non-pedophiles that are any more effective than the many failed attempts to convert gay men and lesbians into heterosexuals.
In my experience, pedophiles are the most likely to commit their offenses when they feel that they have nothing going for them in their lives and that therefore they have nothing to lose. People are most likely to do the most desperate things when they feel the most desperate. Unfortunately, much of the current social systems greatly increase rather than decrease these people’s feelings of desperation.
Despite the fact that many people imagine sex offenders to be insatiable predators or ticking time bombs, only 10−15 percent of sex offenders commit new offenses. I believe we can prevent a much greater number of victims if we put greater energies into early detection and provide support before the first offense occurs, rather than relying only on stronger and stronger punishments after the fact.
There is no scientific consensus on what causes pedophilia.
But even if I grant you what you're saying, being predisposed to find childre… moren sexually attractive is not the same as finding your own gender sexually attractive.
Pedophiles do not have partners, they have victims.
If you have these urges and seek help, you deserve help.
If you have these urges and do not seek help, you are a danger to yourself and others.
Perhaps, but this entire time you've predicated your argument on the idea that:
Regardless of whether zoophilia and pedophilia are legal or not, that doesn't change the fact that some people seem to be born with it. These people have to hide themselves and resist their urges (sometimes for their entire life). **At least homosexuals can embrace the massive support they're getting from mainstream media nowadays. The zoophilic and pedophilic community are constantly being demonised by media today.
If you were suggesting 'perhaps we shouldn't employ witch hunting tactics', as in this article, that might be one thing. 'or the way psychologists and health care providers deal with those who come forward in confidence needs to be revised'
But you are deliberately drawing a parallel between the struggles of homosexuality and pedophilia. In a thread specifically about LGBT issues. You're even using terms like 'community', and tacitly suggesting they deserve mainstream acceptance from the media, in the same way as the lgbt community.
People who are pedophiles and seek help deserve help. I just said that. But it is a disorder in a way homosexuality is not, because pedophilia is sexual attraction to children.
There are no safe spaces for pedophiles, the way there are for homosexuals because that would be by de-facto a hostile place for the victims.
Current scientific research reports that pedophilia is probably caused by an atypical wiring in the brain. This is a good interview by James… more Cantor, Ph.D., an international expert on pedophilia:
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/08/what-can-be-done-about-pedophilia/279024/
There are a couple of lines here that I think you should pay particular attention to:
Thinking of pedophilia as an innate characteristic that a person did not choose and cannot change can go a very long way in helping society come to a rational response to the problem—one that can help prevent molestation of children.
We have not yet found a way to convert pedophiles into non-pedophiles that are any more effective than the many failed attempts to convert gay men and lesbians into heterosexuals.
In my experience, pedophiles are the most likely to commit their offenses when they feel that they have nothing going for them in their lives a… [view original content]
Paedophilia and zoophilia always lack consent. Homosexuality only lacks consent as much as heterosexuality.
There's your answer.
if you're saying what about the people who are paedophiles and don't act on their desires, I think it's extremely admirable. But they are not denied any rights, as there are moral issues with non consentual marriage, so there's no specific legal change that would fight for.
I don't understand why whenever sexual discrimination is brought up, it almost always exclusively involves the LGBT community. What about th… moree zoophilic community? What about the pedophilic community?
I'm not here to argue about the legality of pedophilia or zoophilia. However there's just as much evidence to suggest that zoophilia and pedophilia are as natural as homosexuality e.g. they can be observed in animals, there's no cure etc.
Regardless of whether zoophilia and pedophilia are legal or not, that doesn't change the fact that some people seem to be born with it. These people have to hide themselves and resist their urges (sometimes for their entire life). At least homosexuals can embrace the massive support they're getting from mainstream media nowadays. The zoophilic and pedophilic community are constantly being demonised by media today. The media makes it sound like all pedophiles are rapists. That's false. Many pedophiles are a… [view original content]
The way that paedophilies and bestiaphiles are fine is if they never act on their urges because if they did the sex would be by definition non consensual and hence by definition rape.
Paedophiles are only denied rights if they act on these urges by raping a child. If a paedophiles suppresses the urges for the whole of his or her life, they are given exactly the same amount of rights as anyone else.
Homosexuals on the other hand ARE capable of consensual sex, and hence should be given full rights as heterosexuals have e.g. gay marriage.
Furthermore, this is why bullying someone for having gay sex is horrible and bullying someone for paedophilic sex is not: paedophilic sex ALWAYS includes abuse.
(The lgbt community faces just as bad stuff as these people in other countries, I might add.)
The idea that humans cannot have sexual relations with an animal because the animal cannot give consent is laughable. Did you ask an animal … morefor consent before you killed it and ate it? Did you ask an animal for consent before you locked it up in a cage for your own amusement? Did you ask an animal for consent before you killed it and turned it into your comfortable fur coat?
Don't say you need to kill animals for a healthy diet. PETA has proven time and time again that human beings are perfectly capable of being healthy without consuming meat.
Above all this, I already made it clear in my original post that I was not here to argue the legality of pedophilia or zoophilia. My premise was that current scientific research indicates that they are just as natural as homosexuality. Thus indiscriminately demonising both zoophiles and pedophiles constitutes sexual discrimination. Sexual discrimination that's worse than anything the LGBT community is facing atm.
Paedophilia and zoophilia always lack consent. Homosexuality only lacks consent as much as heterosexuality.
There's your answer.
if yo… moreu're saying what about the people who are paedophiles and don't act on their desires, I think it's extremely admirable. But they are not denied any rights, as there are moral issues with non consentual marriage, so there's no specific legal change that would fight for.
Excuse me, what?
That meme seems to relate to nothing I'm talking about. Unless you ARE a sexually active paedophile in which case I suggest you DO arrest yourself.
Just been sent this and figured I shoudl post it here instead of making a new thread.
I had no idea that marriage equality was happening so quickly, last time I actually counted it was only in 10 states, and now 2/3 of americans live in states with it!
Just been sent this and figured I shoudl post it here instead of making a new thread.
I had no idea that marriage equality was happening … moreso quickly, last time I actually counted it was only in 10 states, and now 2/3 of americans live in states with it!
Comments
Treat others the way you want to be treated.
But they aren't following the golden rule far more dramatically than me.
Yes, I used passive aggressive language. No, I wouldn't be that happy if it was used against me.
But they said that I'm disgusting and in two cases that I should be killed. And I think they'd be far more unhappy if I were to call them that.
Homosexuals are far more prone to being afected by it however:
If you are an LGBT youth you are much, much more likely to commit suicide because of school bullying.
On the forum though, making accusations without specifying names puts everyone on trial. I haven't read every comment in this thread, but I don't think anyone here has said those things to you. If they have, well, that's still just a select group of people. Be snarky in your replies to them specifically, not to the forum as a whole.
It needs to start somewhere. You've said you think all people who are against homosexualism are homophobes. They've called you disgusting. What's happened here is generalization on both sides. I'm sure someone here would be nice who has just entered the conversation, but because of your generalizations, they are insulted and won't talk. The same example can be applied with a supporter of homosexualism, like yourself and them being generalized as disgusting. They won't talk either. But some people, some people are different. Generalizing everyone without their reasons hurts them and your cause.
I'm gonna to use myself as an example. I am not exactly a 'supporter' of homosexuality, and I'm already labeled as a homophobe. And any desire to calmly debate is gone. Vice Versa if I was supporter of homosexuality.
My point is ANY GENERALIZATION OF ANY KIND is wrong. Whether it be everyone who isn't a supporter of homosexualism is a homophobe, to that anyone is racist is a monster, to that all men are rapists. If someone, and that someone could be you, show that not of one of everything is the same, changes can be made.
...Nobody here has said you were disgusting because of your sexuality, nor have I seen any death threats towards you or anyone else for their sexuality on the forums. If that is actually happening then that is terrible and inexcusable. But lashing out at everyone because a select few are being assholes isn't going to help you or anyone else for that matter.
Hello everyone.
I want to firstly apologise for my language and tonation. Yes, I could have phrased my views in a less confrontational manner. I understand that lots of you were offended by this, and that's not a good thing. I had just discovered the video when I posted this thread, and was in fits of tears because it reminded me of a particularly bad experience I had with LGBT bullying which I shall not be going into. This emotion does not excuse my words, but does I hope give insight into their origin. In the future I shall wait until I have calmed down before posting similar threads.
However, while my emotion clouded my argument, I stand by the fundamentals of what I have been saying. I hope now to more clearly elucidate my views.
Saying 'I think homosexuals are disgusting' is homophobia by its dictionary definition, and there's no way of getting around that.
I also do not think the opinions of bigots should be 'respected' (whatever that word technically means). Saying that someone who is black is inferior with regard to their race is not a respectable opinion, saying someone who is female is incapable with regard to their sex is not a respectable opinion, saying someone who is lesbian is disgusting with regard to her sexuality is not a respectable opinion.
There also seems to be a clash of ideals here. Homosexulaity and homophobia are not the same thing, much like race and racism. That is to say, disliking someone because they ARE something is bad in a way that disliking someone because they THINK something is not.
For example:
If a person is born without legs, disliking them purely because they lack legs is horrible.
If a person believes that it is okay to rob people, disliking them purely because they rob people is acceptable, if occasionally not compassionate.
Now, why is disliking them purely because they lack legs horrible? Because them lacking legs isn't up to them.
Hence why disliking someone for their race, which they also can't control, is horrible. Hence disliking someone for their sexulaity, which they can't control (evidence: here, here, here, here, and [here](http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26572-study-of-hundreds-of-male-twins-zeroes-in-on-gay-genes.html#.VJpCkV4gAp "Title". There is still debate, as the articles linked show, over whether homosexuality is something you are born with or something that you develop in normal growth as a child: this is however irrelevant, as regardless of whether it is born or gained, it is not chosen).
Not to mention that it's illogical that people would choose to be gay: there are literally no advantages to it over heterosexuality.
Now some people think that the act of gay sex itself is wrong and that when they say 'homosexuality is disgusting' they really mean 'homosexuality isn't disgusting but homosexual sex is'. This theory, despite the definitial dissonance, has an issue when used by non-religious people.
The only non-religious argument I've seen for the specific act of homosexual sex being wrong is that the organs weren't designed for that. I surely don't need to explain how that is flawed: I would imagine that these people use their hands and mouths during coitus, neither of which are designed for sexual intercourse.
Religious arguments are more difficult and certainly more personal, but they begin to unravel when we look at other things which are forbidden in, say, the Bible, that they do not themselves adhere to.
Such as wearing clothing of more than one fabric and having a field with more than one plant growing on it.
'Thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed; neither shall a garment of mingled linen and woolen come upon thee' - Leviticus 19:19.
Now, I'm no expert on the inner-workings of America's clothing industry. but I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of people using Leviticus as a reason why homosexual sex is a negative thing wear clothes that have more than one fabric in them.
(while we're on the Good Book, it also says, as one of it's best messages, 'Judge not lest ye be judged' - Matthew 7:1, which is strange considering that telling us our lives are sinful and that we must repent is very much judging us as only God should).
This hasn't come up before, but I feel it might be worth people noting that I am a Christian myself: I simply do not believe the Bible is wholly accurate, nor literal, particularly with regard to the Old Testament. Jesus' teachings mean a lot to me personally, so I hope people don't view me as 'Christian bashing' - my point is merely that if you use such passages as reasons why homosexuals are sinful, then you are almost certainly just as sinful, and thus hypocritical.
Thus, arguments that homosexuality is a choice are flawed and shown to be incorrect by science, and arguments that homosexual sex specifically is bad are shown to be wrong either by science or by pointing out inconsistencies with the beliefs of those who believe it is hated by god.
Also notable is the fact that the idea that homosexuality can be cured by going to bible camps and by undergoing psychotherapy is very much doing more harm than good: children undergoing these pressures from their family are far more likely to kill themselves than to change their sexuality, which hasn't even been shown to be scientifically possible, let alone spiritually so. Hence even if you may think that curing homosexuality is desirable, know that advocating it right now with the current methods available is far more likely to destroy someone than to help them.
I shall respect your views in as much as acknowledge that you're entitled to have them, but that does not require me to agree with them, nor to approve of them, nor to try to convince you otherwise, as indeed the people who say homosexulaity is wrong try to convince me to change myself (although, again, sexuality cannot be changed, so this seems rather fruitless. Perhaps it simply means I should never engage in sex with a male, and I'm free to fantasise about whatever I want in my head. I'm unclear as to what they actually want to happen to homosexuals, actually, if someone could clarify what they hope to achieve I'd be grateful.
(Also I would like to raise the point that saying 'just don't care what people think' is going to lead nowhere good, especially as people were extremely angry at me when I tried showing them the apathy they supposedly wanted for their opinions).
Thank you for the comments made by both LGBT allies and those who are not, and I hope the discussion can continue more fruitfully from henceforth.
Why not?
If there're racist people on the internet, why not try to change their views? You might just make a difference, and any progress against racism/whatever other kind of bigotry, even if its small, is at least progress. I know I have made a difference with at least 7 people by discussing the issue with them.
Someone on the first page said that it's disgusting. They got 4 likes, and their comment was later deleted by the mods, and their creator banned.
Earlier in the year there were two threads asking for me to be put to death, including slurs such as 'faggot' and 'cocksucking pervert'.
I don't understand why whenever sexual discrimination is brought up, it almost always exclusively involves the LGBT community. What about the zoophilic community? What about the pedophilic community?
I'm not here to argue about the legality of pedophilia or zoophilia. However there's just as much evidence to suggest that zoophilia and pedophilia are as natural as homosexuality e.g. they can be observed in animals, there's no cure etc.
Regardless of whether zoophilia and pedophilia are legal or not, that doesn't change the fact that some people seem to be born with it. These people have to hide themselves and resist their urges (sometimes for their entire life). At least homosexuals can embrace the massive support they're getting from mainstream media nowadays. The zoophilic and pedophilic community are constantly being demonised by media today. The media makes it sound like all pedophiles are rapists. That's false. Many pedophiles are attracted to children but are able to practice self-control and resist their urges. However this kind of stuff never makes it into media. Same case for the zoophiles.
I know there's still a long way to go for the LGBT community but I think that if you're a member of the LGBT community you should be greatful for all the progress that has already been made for your community. Trust me, you have no idea how difficult it is to be born a zoophile or a pedophile.
You know what's interesting about Walt's and Matthew's relationship in TWD S2, is not only was it a homosexual relationship but it was in some ways, a pedophilia relationship as well, at least to me, Walter looks like he's in his early 40s or mid 30s and Matthew looks like he's in his 20s, so I guess an okay start when it comes pedophilia in fiction, though to be honest in real life, I don't have much respect for pedophiles who want to fuck a 4 or 10-year old.
I'm sorry that has happened to you. But it still doesn't give you a free pass to overgeneralize a large group of people in an antagonistic fashion just because of some immature assholes. Everyone is going to be treated unfairly at one point in life, that is no excuse to treat others unfairly.
A homophobe is someone who either dislikes homosexuals (just for being homosexual), fears homosexuals, or carries out some form of prejudice against homosexuals. One can be against homosexuality and yet carry no dislike of homosexual individuals, carry no fear of homosexuals, and hold no prejudice against homosexuals. Placing the homophobe label upon anyone carrying an opposing opinion to your own on this matter is kind of unreasonable.
By that rule, then rude people want other people to be rude to them.
I'll admit that I didn't watch all the way to the very end of the video, so I didn't catch the box burning (I stopped at the point that they were dragging the guy into the forest) . This doesn't change the fact that the mob in the video was clearly malicious, and you are comparing that to people who disagree with homosexuality in general, which is unfair. Anyway though, I see what you're saying with the box symbolism, and that is fair. However, I'll say once again: "I'm not sure if you're legitimately looking to debate over the acceptance of homosexuality or looking to ask people to just conform to your opinion because anything that doesn't coincide with yours makes you feel bad. I suppose that I should clarify that I am by no means content with you feeling bad, but such a thing by itself is not going to be enough to cause someone to change what they believe to be right. People can disagree with your opinion on this matter and still not think any less of you as a person. I for one would treat you no differently than I would any other person in the world."
I agree with you in the fact that saying such a thing is not okay.
Not being equal in what sense exactly? Where is the difference in equality expressed in the general idea of disagreement with homosexuality? People against homosexuality are not necessarily of the mind that homosexuals are not their equals.
This is completely fucking disgusting.
Homosexuality is between two consenting adults.
Animals and children can't consent by definition.
Is this an honest comparison, or are you just trying to rile people up.
Also J-Master, a relationship with someone in his 20 year old is NOT pedophillia.
Pedophila means people who like to have sex with children, pre-teens to be exact, there's a different term for people who like teenagers but I forgot what it was and I don't feel like looking it up, anyway it doesn't matter, Matthew looks like he's somewhere in his mid-20s and therefore an adult, unless they were together for more than half a decade it's unlikely the relationship started when Matthew was underaged, so it's very unlikely that the relationship was ever illegal and much less pedophilic, I find it a bit weird when people with such big age gaps are together but there's nothing really wrong with something like that, for example I'm 23 and I would l have a massive crush on Daniel Craig who is just a couple of years younger than my father, I don't really think it's weird for older people to like 20 year olds either since people are generally at their most atractive around their 20s, the thing that mostly baffles me about such relationships is finding stuff to talk about with someone who is so much older than you but if I got things right Walter was Matthew's teacher at University I think, which if the relationship started at that time it's really unprofessional of Walter but whatever, anyway they seemed to have similar interests.
And while wanting to have sex is twisted and definitely something bad it probably should be condemned a bit less and perhaps try to offer psychological help for pedophiles instead of just telling them they are bad, of course I'm referring specifically to pedophiles that don't act on their instincts as the ones that do should obviously just be sent to jail, as doing stuff like that is pretty much rape regardless of what the abuser and the victim say, anyway there's a movie called "Little Children" that I think handles the topic really well, it's not it's main plot-line but it has more than one story as it's one of those movies that is about interconnected stories and you get to see various character's perspectives and I thought the character who was a pedophile was really interesting and despite the fact that I hate pedophiles to the point where I've punched people that were only mentioning it as a joke I didn't really hate that character I didn't like him but I kinda felt sorry for him.
Anyway I don't know where I'm going with this so I'll just stop.
Thank you. I was going to point this out, but you said it way better than me.
Thank you for pointing it out.
The idea that humans cannot have sexual relations with an animal because the animal cannot give consent is laughable. Did you ask an animal for consent before you killed it and ate it? Did you ask an animal for consent before you locked it up in a cage for your own amusement? Did you ask an animal for consent before you killed it and turned it into your comfortable fur coat?
Don't say you need to kill animals for a healthy diet. PETA has proven time and time again that human beings are perfectly capable of being healthy without consuming meat.
Above all this, I already made it clear in my original post that I was not here to argue the legality of pedophilia or zoophilia. My premise was that current scientific research indicates that they are just as natural as homosexuality. Thus indiscriminately demonising both zoophiles and pedophiles constitutes sexual discrimination. Sexual discrimination that's worse than anything the LGBT community is facing atm.
I didn't bring legality into question, I brought ethics into it. Pedophillia is rape. Of children.
This isn't fucking quibbling over the legality of marijuana here. Are you going to argue about the persecution of murderers as well? If we're leaving all ethical and legal concerns at the door?
Pedophillia isn't rape if they resist their urges.
And for some people it is equally disguisting as homosexuality.
Yeah, and they're wrong.
homosexuality is between two consenting adults.
And second of all, even if you don't assault a child, just simply searching for images of children like that, helps an underground industry of abuse. Those pictures come from somewhere.
Yes people with those urges who come forward for help should be helped. But that doesn't mean pedophillia shouldn't be condemned. The reason we would be giving them help is so they are less likely to hurt someone. It is not the equivalent of homosexuality, and the comparison to it is distasteful to be putting it extremely mildly.
Let's just agree to disagree. ( And yes I hate pedophilliacs.)
You're free to exit the discussion if it makes you uncomfortable, but don't play the 'agree to disagree' card when you have come at me with
As fuel for your argument. You are not the peacemaker here.
Well neither are you. And I don't want to make people pissed at me and ultimately make me banned.
Lol this thread is so controversial and epic
False equivalence.
Nobody is born a murderer.
However current scientific research suggests that people are born as pedophiles. Thus they should not be indiscriminately condemned because nobody gets to choose how they're born.
Since we're bringing ethics into this, I have to question why you're discriminating an entire group for the misdeeds of some. It's like condemning all homosexual just because a man raped another man. Human beings sure are hypocritical creatures.
There is no scientific consensus on what causes pedophilia.
But even if I grant you what you're saying, being predisposed to find children sexually attractive is not the same as finding your own gender sexually attractive.
Pedophiles do not have partners, they have victims.
If you have these urges and seek help, you deserve help.
If you have these urges and do not seek help, you are a danger to yourself and others.
I never understood gay people. Take for example a gay man. He sees a beautiful woman with a great body talking to an ordirnary man and he thinks how the man is hot. I feel sorry for them instead of hating them. And people don't really support gays because they think it's right. They support them because everyone else does and they just tag along.
And if this means that people will hate me for it I'm sorry. I'm sorry because of you, not me.
Current scientific research reports that pedophilia is probably caused by an atypical wiring in the brain. This is a good interview by James Cantor, Ph.D., an international expert on pedophilia:
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/08/what-can-be-done-about-pedophilia/279024/
There are a couple of lines here that I think you should pay particular attention to:
Perhaps, but this entire time you've predicated your argument on the idea that:
If you were suggesting 'perhaps we shouldn't employ witch hunting tactics', as in this article, that might be one thing. 'or the way psychologists and health care providers deal with those who come forward in confidence needs to be revised'
But you are deliberately drawing a parallel between the struggles of homosexuality and pedophilia. In a thread specifically about LGBT issues. You're even using terms like 'community', and tacitly suggesting they deserve mainstream acceptance from the media, in the same way as the lgbt community.
People who are pedophiles and seek help deserve help. I just said that. But it is a disorder in a way homosexuality is not, because pedophilia is sexual attraction to children.
There are no safe spaces for pedophiles, the way there are for homosexuals because that would be by de-facto a hostile place for the victims.
Paedophilia and zoophilia always lack consent. Homosexuality only lacks consent as much as heterosexuality.
There's your answer.
if you're saying what about the people who are paedophiles and don't act on their desires, I think it's extremely admirable. But they are not denied any rights, as there are moral issues with non consentual marriage, so there's no specific legal change that would fight for.
But no it isn't.
The way that paedophilies and bestiaphiles are fine is if they never act on their urges because if they did the sex would be by definition non consensual and hence by definition rape.
Paedophiles are only denied rights if they act on these urges by raping a child. If a paedophiles suppresses the urges for the whole of his or her life, they are given exactly the same amount of rights as anyone else.
Homosexuals on the other hand ARE capable of consensual sex, and hence should be given full rights as heterosexuals have e.g. gay marriage.
Furthermore, this is why bullying someone for having gay sex is horrible and bullying someone for paedophilic sex is not: paedophilic sex ALWAYS includes abuse.
(The lgbt community faces just as bad stuff as these people in other countries, I might add.)
Sorry I just love DW gifs.
Excuse me, what?
That meme seems to relate to nothing I'm talking about. Unless you ARE a sexually active paedophile in which case I suggest you DO arrest yourself.
Just been sent this and figured I shoudl post it here instead of making a new thread.
I had no idea that marriage equality was happening so quickly, last time I actually counted it was only in 10 states, and now 2/3 of americans live in states with it!
Lokk at my country. (Against means gay support)