So none of you have the book yet?
Heh.
[quote]overstand wrote:
“Freedom of speech” as some abstract, independent ideal doesn’t and hasn’t ever truly existed.
The people arguing that censoring a book about pedophilia is a slippery slope toward tyranny and totalitarian government are assuming that we can either be on or off the slope. That’s not and has never been the case. Every society ever has limited speech in some way. You can’t run into an airport screaming about a bomb, you can’t threaten to kill somebody, etc. Google up ‘clear and present danger’ for more examples.
There IS a line, we ARE on the slope. Things like this cause us to redfine ‘the line’ and reevalute where we stand on the slope and sacrifice personal freedoms accordingly. As soon as freedom of expression infringes on someone’s civil liberties, we as a society decide whether or not we are willing to give up some of our freedom in favor of other ideals (safety, security, not getting molested).
Further, one could argue just as strongly that if the government never interfered we would be on just as slippery of a slope toward anarchy and chaos.
Basically what I’m saying is freedom of speech is a hollow concept. When push comes to shove, society will voice its opinion and expression will be censored.
Amazon removing the book out of fear of being boycotted or whatever is the same thing as the government censoring the book, just through the court of public opinion rather than the court of law. [/quote]
This is a very good post. Still not sure I agree with banning the book. There are many other books out there that are a guide how to violate the law. Some are apparently very direct (like this book) or, come with transparent disclaimers (“for entertainment purposes only”) and yet we have many forms of popular media that are much much more subtle. Take for example most crime novels, or the reality CSI type shows (not just the dramatic ones, but the ones based on real life studies). The foregoing media are absolutely a primer on how to commit a crime and not get caught. Hell, they illustrate or dramatize how someone did or did not get caught and WHY!
Although I think your post is very good, and it’s “sound” logically, we could insert any number of issues into your analysis and come out the other end banning something. We can easily insert race or religion into your analysis - because society can decide to give up liberties right? Well, it’s not just that easy. Look at all the litigation that is occurring over homeland security laws and applications thereof?
I guess in the end, I don’t see the book as a danger, but I’m willing to concede victims of molestation, or those that have a relationship with someone that was a victim, might feel different. But I’m not willing to link such a book anymore than I’m willing to draw a line of causality between gangster rap music and some kid shooting someone or, violent movies and some kid or someone with a screw loose committing a crime. I don’t dismiss any relation, I just think the issues are far more complex. I guess I just feel that the people that will molest will molest, book or no book. At the end of the day, I don’t want anything banned or censored, I want the right to choose.
By the way, although I like your post, the freedoms that you imply are so easily trampled upon are not. There have been many freedom of speech issues litigated over the years and many of them have been controversial subject matter and topics - and Justices have given heavy weight to freedom of speech, a constitutional right by the way. Don’t confuse this issue with the dancing and arbitrary line in the sand that has become obscenity. We’re talking speech here. And short of running into a theater and yelling “fire”, that right is one of our strongest.
[quote]Amiright wrote:
[quote]celibrate2047 wrote:
It is very rare that I advocate the banning of something. I absolutely support the banning of any material that is supportive of having sex with children. I know it’s been stated before, but the book is aimed at making it easier to get around the law for engaging in sexual activities with children. Yes…censorship sucks. But would everyone on here that is in favor of not silencing this book be okay with someone standing on the corner talking and passing information about how to get away with having sex with children. It’s freedom of speech after all.
What if a book came out and it was tips on raping a woman and how not to get caught?
Isn’t there a line that eventually gets crossed?
Censorship happens and sometimes it’s perfectly okay. If I published a book on how to bomb a school without getting caught, would we all just turn a blind eye? I realize that’s extreme and not in the same catagory but both are examples of an activity that involves hurting others and skirting the law.
This would be the first time I’ve ever advocated banning a book or any material of the same.[/quote]
All this information is already out there… letting your emotions cloud the issue is counter productive. As others have stated… should murder novels, movies, shows etc… be censored too. I’m almost positive I can murder some random person or bomb a place and get away with it… am I ever going to try… or even give it more thought past this post… absolutely not… but hints/tips etc… can easily be found in books or online.
If you want your freedoms you must allow it… the instant you decide something like this is no longer legal(writing a book promoting pedophilia… lol feel weird even saying that)… you start a chain reaction… no one can be trusted to make such a judgment call… who knows what else they disprove of.
also sorry if this post makes no sense… its 5 am lol [/quote]
I understand what you’re saying. However, I still stand behind my opinion. The book isn’t some sick story about a mann and a child in some weird fictional love story…fine…I don’t care if that’s published. But when you’re printing out a primer on how to how to have sex with children and get away with it, you have a primer on how to hurt people.
Those of you that support not banning this book, would you also not support banning a book that basically said, “if you follow steps 1-5, you can rape a woman and not get caught” and so now we have rapists that are adopting these techniques and now getting away with rape. Of course it’s not going to cause someone to rape, just as the other book isn’t going to cause anyone to rape/molest children. However, it gives them a guideline on how to do it and avoid the law and keep doing it.
[quote]The Ronin wrote:
So none of you have the book yet?
Heh.[/quote]
Just ordered a few copies, along with some scat porn, gay porn, BDSM porn, midget porn, and the creme de la creme - bestiality porn straight from mexico and south america! Man do I dig a chick on a horse (or is that “under” a horse? lol) 
Oh, and I forgot all the reading material I ordered with the requisite thinly veiled rape “fantasy” - I knew them bitches always secretly wanted it! A couple of hours of this, with some gangsta rap playing very softly in the background (for subliminal effect of course) along with a healthy dose of CSI crime shows and I’ll be a walking time bomb of rape, perversion and criminal intent.
Now, that stupidity above aside, I do think the government probably has the right to track the users of this type of material. I think it’s far more valuable to be able to have the purchasers of books like this in a database somewhere to be checked out by law enforcement. Hell, anyone ordering this book would practically be self reporting into a sex offenders database. Before someone comes along and says, well that would be illegal, guess again. It’s not. You can be investigated for suspicion of criminal activity and buying books like this would certain cast a cloud of suspicion over you. You certainly have the right to buy and read the book, but you don’t have the right not to have your potentially criminal conduct investigated.
So, for those that find this book so horrendous it should be banned - I ask you. Would you rather law enforcement KNOW who is buying these books or, would you rather they continue to ply their trade in secrecy?
[quote]celibrate2047 wrote:
[quote]Amiright wrote:
[quote]celibrate2047 wrote:
It is very rare that I advocate the banning of something. I absolutely support the banning of any material that is supportive of having sex with children. I know it’s been stated before, but the book is aimed at making it easier to get around the law for engaging in sexual activities with children. Yes…censorship sucks. But would everyone on here that is in favor of not silencing this book be okay with someone standing on the corner talking and passing information about how to get away with having sex with children. It’s freedom of speech after all.
What if a book came out and it was tips on raping a woman and how not to get caught?
Isn’t there a line that eventually gets crossed?
Censorship happens and sometimes it’s perfectly okay. If I published a book on how to bomb a school without getting caught, would we all just turn a blind eye? I realize that’s extreme and not in the same catagory but both are examples of an activity that involves hurting others and skirting the law.
This would be the first time I’ve ever advocated banning a book or any material of the same.[/quote]
All this information is already out there… letting your emotions cloud the issue is counter productive. As others have stated… should murder novels, movies, shows etc… be censored too. I’m almost positive I can murder some random person or bomb a place and get away with it… am I ever going to try… or even give it more thought past this post… absolutely not… but hints/tips etc… can easily be found in books or online.
If you want your freedoms you must allow it… the instant you decide something like this is no longer legal(writing a book promoting pedophilia… lol feel weird even saying that)… you start a chain reaction… no one can be trusted to make such a judgment call… who knows what else they disprove of.
also sorry if this post makes no sense… its 5 am lol [/quote]
I understand what you’re saying. However, I still stand behind my opinion. The book isn’t some sick story about a mann and a child in some weird fictional love story…fine…I don’t care if that’s published. But when you’re printing out a primer on how to how to have sex with children and get away with it, you have a primer on how to hurt people.
Those of you that support not banning this book, would you also not support banning a book that basically said, “if you follow steps 1-5, you can rape a woman and not get caught” and so now we have rapists that are adopting these techniques and now getting away with rape. Of course it’s not going to cause someone to rape, just as the other book isn’t going to cause anyone to rape/molest children. However, it gives them a guideline on how to do it and avoid the law and keep doing it.
[/quote]
When the tv show CSI first came out, there were people arguing that it was showing criminals how to get away with murder. Some wanted the tv show banned because of this.
The question posed to you is once we start banning books based on what “you” find appropriate for people to buy, where is the line drawn?
No, some book about rape would not be banned by me. I believe in freedom of speech, not “freedom of speech as long as they say what I want them to say”.
This is the same argument they had when the movie Natural Borne Killers first came out…that movies like that aren’t art and can cause someone to start killing for no reason.
It is the same argument people in the 50’s had against Elvis Presley’s gyrating hips.
It isn’t your place to stop people from buying whatever books they please unless those books themselves are illegal by containing illegal acts. To my knowledge, there is no porn in this book.
[quote]celibrate2047 wrote:
I understand what you’re saying. However, I still stand behind my opinion. The book isn’t some sick story about a mann and a child in some weird fictional love story…fine…I don’t care if that’s published. But when you’re printing out a primer on how to how to have sex with children and get away with it, you have a primer on how to hurt people.
Those of you that support not banning this book, would you also not support banning a book that basically said, “if you follow steps 1-5, you can rape a woman and not get caught” and so now we have rapists that are adopting these techniques and now getting away with rape. Of course it’s not going to cause someone to rape, just as the other book isn’t going to cause anyone to rape/molest children. However, it gives them a guideline on how to do it and avoid the law and keep doing it.
[/quote]
I get what you’re saying, and I agree with your sensibilities. But you are really missing the point that the material you use as an example already does exist in the media. Every account of a crime, whether it appears in the newspaper, magazine, or is portrayed on film, is a primer on how to commit a successful crime. For crying out loud - haven’t you watched any of these HIGHLY sophisticated reality crime shows on TV? They have educated a generation about advanced investigative and CSI techniques, including little known poisons. The information is already there, millions watch the shows and it’s called “entertainment”. I repeat that I agree with your sensibilities, but when measured against logic, those sensibilities crumble.
For example: I am not a rapist. I have no desire to rape a woman and I will never rape a woman. I have never studied the subject. However, with the media in my lifetime, I know to wear a condom (DNA), force her to douche and take a shower - thus destroying all DNA evidence. I could continue with details, but you get the point I hope. I knew nothing about how to commit a rape until my exposure to modern media.
One thing that is important to remember is that many child predators are not quite exactly the same as people with “regular” sexual appetites. Many child predators have a similar sort of ritualistic behavior as a serial killer.
For example, many serial killers start with the torture and killing of animals. Eventually, this becomes more ritualized and they start to create elaborate fantasies about killing people and may substitute animals but eventually that isn’t enough. They will fetishistically plan their killing for a long time until they find the “right” victim. Of course, it doesn’t stop there, as they usually keep “improving” their kills to match their fantasies.
Child predators are often the same way. Many begin with what they believe to be “innocent” admiration for a certain child, which builds into fantasy. Almost all of them indulge in pornography, but for many of them it is not enough to complete their specific fantasy. This is why many child predators (similar to serial killers) have a “type” that they keep molesting as they are trying to recreate their own fantasy perfectly.
So, I do think there is danger in allowing this sort of stuff to be out there. With that said, I cannot support banning it. I support banning child pornography, because a child is harmed in the very making of the video or whatever. But I can’t support banning material like this. I think they should be held to the same standard that, for example, makers of other instructional materials are: if somebody is harmed following their instructions, they can be held liable. At the very least, I support the right for the parents of a child who was harmed using this sort of “instruction manual” to sue the author in civil court. The majority of Americans (like myself) can read “true crime” accounts and not see them as an instruction manual of sorts, when in fact they do often contain extensive and detailed analysis that could be seen as such.
It’s a tough topic. I do think there is danger in “legitimizing” child molestation by allowing stuff like this. There have already been defenses tried that use the logic of being “born this way” as a pedophile- aping the argument that homosexuals (whom I have no problem with) have successfully used to legitimize behavior that was once thought to be deviant. Despite all of that, I must stand by the Thomas Jefferson (I think) quote that is something along the lines of, “those who would trade liberty for safety deserve neither.” Outright banning of books is a slippery slope indeed.
[quote]“This is my attempt to make pedophile situations safer for those juveniles that find themselves involved in them, by establishing certian rules for these adults to follow. I hope to achieve this by appealing to the better nature of pedosexuals, with hope that their doing so will result in less hatred and perhaps liter sentences should they ever be caught.”
[/quote]
I got some rules for pedos to follow: Don’t fuck kids, and go lay in traffic.
There’s a difference between banning a book and choosing not to sell it. If Amazon has a policy against selling books about certain topics then they should follow that policy. People are taking this too far. They are advocating boycotting Amazon completely and PETA has asked Amazon to remove books about dogfighting (didn’t know there were books about dogfighting and I think their authors should be treated just like people who breed dogs for dogfighting and that is not becoming the QB of a pro football team). This has snowballed into a whole different thing now.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
One thing that is important to remember is that many child predators are not quite exactly the same as people with “regular” sexual appetites. Many child predators have a similar sort of ritualistic behavior as a serial killer.
For example, many serial killers start with the torture and killing of animals. Eventually, this becomes more ritualized and they start to create elaborate fantasies about killing people and may substitute animals but eventually that isn’t enough. They will fetishistically plan their killing for a long time until they find the “right” victim. Of course, it doesn’t stop there, as they usually keep “improving” their kills to match their fantasies.
Child predators are often the same way. Many begin with what they believe to be “innocent” admiration for a certain child, which builds into fantasy. Almost all of them indulge in pornography, but for many of them it is not enough to complete their specific fantasy. This is why many child predators (similar to serial killers) have a “type” that they keep molesting as they are trying to recreate their own fantasy perfectly.
So, I do think there is danger in allowing this sort of stuff to be out there. With that said, I cannot support banning it. I support banning child pornography, because a child is harmed in the very making of the video or whatever. But I can’t support banning material like this. I think they should be held to the same standard that, for example, makers of other instructional materials are: if somebody is harmed following their instructions, they can be held liable. At the very least, I support the right for the parents of a child who was harmed using this sort of “instruction manual” to sue the author in civil court. The majority of Americans (like myself) can read “true crime” accounts and not see them as an instruction manual of sorts, when in fact they do often contain extensive and detailed analysis that could be seen as such.
It’s a tough topic. I do think there is danger in “legitimizing” child molestation by allowing stuff like this. There have already been defenses tried that use the logic of being “born this way” as a pedophile- aping the argument that homosexuals (whom I have no problem with) have successfully used to legitimize behavior that was once thought to be deviant. Despite all of that, I must stand by the Thomas Jefferson (I think) quote that is something along the lines of, “those who would trade liberty for safety deserve neither.” Outright banning of books is a slippery slope indeed. [/quote]
Very good post.
As for “legitimizing” pedophilia, I think it’s important to note its been within the spectrum of sexuality as far back as history goes - right along side other expressions, including homosexuality, etc. And it is even more important to note that there is a cultural and even temporal lens that cannot be ignored. Let’s get islamic nations out of the way. We all know that the age of consent is much lower in those countries than here. So, what we consider pedophilia here, is not an offense in those countries. I’m a bit troubled by this. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t advocate sleeping with 14 year olds, but I’m still troubled by the disparity. Before we condemn those in the islamic countries, we travel back in time a few hundred years to a european country or two where the age of consent was 11. Yes. ELEVEN.
DISCLAIMER: IF THIS SOUNDS LIKE I’M DEFENDING PEDOPHILIA I AM NOT. IF I KNEW YOU MOLESTED CHILDREN, I’D FIND A WAY TO LEAVER YOU IN THE WOODS WHERE NO ONE WOULD FIND YOU EVER AGAIN. EVER. AND I’D DO IT TOO.
I’m just wrangling with the issue of legislating morality. I think a pedophile here in the States probably has a moral defense when in other parts of the world, he could marry a 14 year old. Who has it right? Our culture? Or theirs which is based largely on religious doctrine and thus the “word of God”?? Clearly, sexual relations with children of a certain age, under any cultural lens or time, is just wrong. But where is the line? Even our own States cannot agree on the Age of Consent. Is it 16? 17? 18? I believe it’s 17 here in NJ and I cannot imagine having sex with a 17 year old. Is it the start of menses? I culturally believe even our age of consent is thin, but I’ve been CONDITIONED to believe that. What of the Muslim cultured otherwise who takes a 14 year old bride? Can we reject them out of hand, because we’ve been conditioned in our culture to believe otherwise?
Clearly, there is pedophilia that is just plain unacceptable by any cultural or temporal lens. I recognize that very young children, including infants are abused. And again, the “treatment” I would advocate for such a sickness is a prompt and unceremonious death. But is the grown man that romances a 15 year old the same deviant that abused an 8 year old?
We here in the US take this higher moral road, but are we that much higher when we have legislated that it is legally okay for me to have sex with a 17 year old? Is there really that much difference between a 17 year old and a 15 year old? I know some 17 year olds that are more mature and emotionally balanced than some 33 year olds.
And what of the ridiculous cases of the high school boys that slept with his female teacher? Does anyone really believe the boy was “harmed”? Or how about the high school kids charged with “child pornography” for having or transmitting nude pictures of other their own peers?
I’m just spit balling here and I have no real answers - only gut opinions and feelings on what I think is “wrong”. I just think the subject of pedophilia is a bit more complicated than banning some book. And again, I hope no one is construing the above to think I am defending pedophilia or even sympathizing with it - I AM NOT. I’m just taking an unbiased look at it from a historical and cultural perspective and pointing out the disparities. Age of consent in Canada is just 16. Here in US, 16 to 18. Mexico, as low as 12. South America, as low as 15. Is an age morally “right” because a legislator says so? I don’t know about you, but I think most of our legislators are fucking idiots. I’d like a better authority.
[quote]Johnny T Frisk wrote:
Crap now how will I learn to be gentle? Guess I’ll have to stick to hitting and sticking it in their pooper.[/quote]
Laughed.
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
There’s a difference between banning a book and choosing not to sell it. If Amazon has a policy against selling books about certain topics then they should follow that policy. People are taking this too far. They are advocating boycotting Amazon completely and PETA has asked Amazon to remove books about dogfighting (didn’t know there were books about dogfighting and I think their authors should be treated just like people who breed dogs for dogfighting and that is not becoming the QB of a pro football team). This has snowballed into a whole different thing now. [/quote]
Wait…some of you thought it wouldn’t? This is what we were talking about. Once it is “publicly ok” for people to raise hell until this book is pulled, everyone with any axe to grind will be calling for the same thing.
It is a tough position for Amazon but the general public’s reflex reaction to hot button topics is exactly how freedoms get lost.
I predict eventual screening committees for all media which will lead to even more media being “censored” whether you agree with it or not.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
There’s a difference between banning a book and choosing not to sell it. If Amazon has a policy against selling books about certain topics then they should follow that policy. People are taking this too far. They are advocating boycotting Amazon completely and PETA has asked Amazon to remove books about dogfighting (didn’t know there were books about dogfighting and I think their authors should be treated just like people who breed dogs for dogfighting and that is not becoming the QB of a pro football team). This has snowballed into a whole different thing now. [/quote]
Wait…some of you thought it wouldn’t? This is what we were talking about. Once it is “publicly ok” for people to raise hell until this book is pulled, everyone with any axe to grind will be calling for the same thing.
It is a tough position for Amazon but the general public’s reflex reaction to hot button topics is exactly how freedoms get lost.
I predict eventual screening committees for all media which will lead to even more media being “censored” whether you agree with it or not.[/quote]
You’re acting like this is some unprecedented thing. Read my post above. Freedom of speech has never been unconditional for as long as society has existed. Protesting the draft was made illegal in WWII based on the concept of ‘clear and present danger.’ If you’re at an airport and talk about hijacking a plane, you’re going to suffer consequences, even if you were just joking. We allow people freedom of expression up until the point where it infringes on somebody else’s civil liberties, at which point we draw the line.
Just because somebody has an agenda doesn’t mean their opinion holds any weight. People protested Catcher in the Rye, but it persists. People protested Elvis, yet he persisted. People protested CSI, yet it persists. Dogfighting books or whatever the fuck PETA is bitching about now will persist.
The pedophile book crossed the line, it was indefensible, it was pulled. Simple as that.
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
There’s a difference between banning a book and choosing not to sell it. If Amazon has a policy against selling books about certain topics then they should follow that policy. People are taking this too far. They are advocating boycotting Amazon completely and PETA has asked Amazon to remove books about dogfighting (didn’t know there were books about dogfighting and I think their authors should be treated just like people who breed dogs for dogfighting and that is not becoming the QB of a pro football team). This has snowballed into a whole different thing now. [/quote]
Michael Vick did the crime, did the time and now it’s time to forgive him. If he fucks up again, he will be punished again, but for now he’s saying and doing all the right things. He’s already won me over the way he’s playing.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
There’s a difference between banning a book and choosing not to sell it. If Amazon has a policy against selling books about certain topics then they should follow that policy. People are taking this too far. They are advocating boycotting Amazon completely and PETA has asked Amazon to remove books about dogfighting (didn’t know there were books about dogfighting and I think their authors should be treated just like people who breed dogs for dogfighting and that is not becoming the QB of a pro football team). This has snowballed into a whole different thing now. [/quote]
Wait…some of you thought it wouldn’t? This is what we were talking about. Once it is “publicly ok” for people to raise hell until this book is pulled, everyone with any axe to grind will be calling for the same thing.
It is a tough position for Amazon but the general public’s reflex reaction to hot button topics is exactly how freedoms get lost.
I predict eventual screening committees for all media which will lead to even more media being “censored” whether you agree with it or not.[/quote]
No, I knew it would. I don’t think there’s a need for banning books or boycotting stores that sell certain books. I would think someone would have taken a look at this book and said “no way in hell are we putting that in our store/on our website.” Obviously, that did not happen. There are tons of other websites for stuff like that to be posted. Again, there’s a difference between banning and choosing not to sell. If you want to call either or both of those censorship, go right ahead, but it is a merchant’s right to choose to sell or not sell a product. Having said that, I am very glad Amazon pulled the book and others like it. Let some third rate porn site sell that book.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]KAS wrote:
Funny how everyone talks about the slippery slope of censorship and promtly jumps on an equaly slippery slope towards legitimising pedophilia.[/quote]
no one is legitimizing pedophilia. we’re talking about a book. we’re no more “legitimizing” pedophilia than arguing against the censorship of a book about murder “legitimizes” murder. these are difficult issues and there are no clear answers and we can all agree to disagree. but if you think someone is actually “legitimizing pedophilia” the thread has passed over your head. [/quote]
It is funny how I got personal attacks for saying the exact same thing. It shows that many here have more of a problem with WHO says what instead of what is being said.
No one in this thread that I can tell is FOR pedophilia. Being against censorship does not mean we are FOR everything that could be censored.[/quote]
Maybe not intentionally, but it is the first step whether you see it or not. People were having the same debate over homosexuals a few decades ago. The is a very real movement trying to legitimise pedophilia and they are using the tactics that other groups have used with great success.
In theory you are right about the censorship side of things. In reality no good can come from this book, and debating something this ugly from a purely accademic perspective is not going to help anyone.
All our rights and freedoms should still be suject to ones moral compass, you have to draw the line somewhere and this is a pretty good place to start.
Edited for format.
Every time I see this thread I think it’s called “Amazing Pedophile Book”.
[quote]Jason van Wyk wrote:
Every time I see this thread I think it’s called “Amazing Pedophile Book”, so I quickly have a look only to be disappointed. But I still ordered it.[/quote]
[quote]KAS wrote:
Maybe not intentionally, but it is the first step whether you see it or not. People were having the same debate over homosexuals a few decades ago. The is a very real movement trying to legitimise pedophilia and they are using the tactics that other groups have used with great success.
In theory you are right about the censorship side of things. In reality no good can come from this book, and debating something this ugly from a purely accademic perspective is not going to help anyone.
All our rights and freedoms should still be suject to ones moral compass, you have to draw the line somewhere and this is a pretty good place to start.
Edited for format. [/quote]
Good post. What about my last post. Where is the line drawn? 12? 14? 15? 16? 18? And where is your moral compass located - because that matters. If your compass is in S. America, it’s a different age. If your compass is located in the middle east, that’s yet a different number. Here in NJ, it’s 16 but if I cross the bridge to PA, it’s 17. Does my moral compass change as I travel? You do realize that a grown man can engage in sexual relations with a girl of 16 years old in many States, including Canada? I don’t care what the law says, personally my moral compass says it wrong for a grown man to have sex with a 16 year old.
So how do we define pedophilia? Where is the line drawn? Of course, I’m asking for the purposes of an intellectual debate. I don’t need any such lines. I think the medical term (it is a medical term) defines it generally to be interest in sex with those that are “prepubescent” or about 13 years or younger. So, I ask you, is sex with a 14 year old girl in puberty okay? Morally?
For the record, I don’t think pedophilia as I understand that above definition (sex with prepubescent children) is defensible in any time, in any country, under any “moral compass”. But we must realize that we do brand those that engage in sex with minors “child molesters”, “sex offenders” and loosely “pedophiles”. Again, I’m not defending them, but looking at the ages of consent around the world, I see lots of imaginary lines and very little “morality”!!