1 edit
Originally posted by mokkoI'm gonna have to take writing lessons from you. In just to paragraphs you say it all. 😞
What evidence or proof could there ever be on how common such a fantasy is if people simply deny having them. I refuse to believe it's such a rare occurance simply due to the demand for child pornography. Obviously It's in this very denial and supression that I believe the actual crimes of humanity stem from.
When you look at the supressive nature of sexua ...[text shortened]... sects you'll see a surprising corralation to sexual crimes being envoked by those supressed.
🙂
Originally posted by mokkoLook up the definition of paedophilia.
Personally I think that grown men having fantasies about young girls is common....
It has nothing to do with being a phedophile and everything to do with the connection of sexual experiences at that point in time for many men.
There's no healthy fantasy involving under-age kids.
And - by the way - instead of revelling in your "violence" fantasies, you might want to consider what they say about you. Just advice; take it or leave it.
1 edit
Originally posted by dottewellThe ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases by the WHO) describes paedophilia as "a sexual preference for children, boys or girls or both, usually of prepubertal or early pubertal age". That isn't very precise, but I believe someone who occasionally has sexual fantasies about children wouldn't normally have a sexual preference for children.
Look up the definition of paedophilia.
There's no healthy fantasy involving under-age kids.
The DSM-IV (the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) is more precise, and most people who have sexual fantasies about children without acting on them wouldn't be considered paedophiles according to it. Here are the criteria:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Over a period of at least six months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).
B. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functoning.
C. The person is at least 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.
Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's considered healthy depends on the culture and changes over time. Homosexuality was considered a disease not so long ago. There seems to be some discussion whether phaedophilia should be taken out of the DSM altogether. Personally, I think someone who fits the current DSM description certainly has big problems, so I think it should stay. But if someone has occasional fantasies without having the urge to act on them, I doubt that's unhealthy.
2 edits
Originally posted by NordlysSo are you agreeing or disagreeing with Mokko, who said occasional sexual fantasies about children had "nothing to do with being a paedophile"?
The ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases by the WHO) describes paedophilia as "a sexual preference for children, boys or girls or both, usually of prepubertal or early pubertal age". That isn't very precise, but I believe someone who occasionally has sexual fantasies about children wouldn't normally have a sexual preference for children.
The D s occasional fantasies without having the urge to act on them, I doubt that's unhealthy.
1 edit
Originally posted by NordlysI will grant that they do not necessarily qualify you for a clinical diagnosis of paedophilia.
I would say that they don't necessarily have to do with paedophilia.
So the fantasies are only harmful if they go on for a certain amount of time, and if they ruin your social life?
1 edit
Originally posted by NordlysApologies for missing out "not". But I am still interested why you "doubt" that's unhealthy.
I think someone who fits the current DSM description certainly has big problems, so I think it should stay. But if someone has occasional fantasies without having the urge to act on them, I doubt that's unhealthy.
Originally posted by dottewellI can imagine that they could be harmful in other ways, for example by creating guilt. They might also be addictive in some cases, so that occasional fantasies would lead to frequent fantasies and eventually to paedophilia. That's just a guess, though. I also don't think it would be healthy if someone nurtured these fantasies.
So the fantasies are only harmful if they go on for a certain amount of time, and if they ruin your social life?
This is like following a debate between two Republicans on the issue of a progressive tax system and how to evade it.
First of all you have to determine whether a paedofile is a criminal, is sick or just culturally different.
Then you have to determine whether "Thoughts" can be criminal (1984?).
Next you must justify a link between "thought" (or fantasy) and progressive behaviour.
Only then will you be able to argue whether thinking about sex with children is consistently unhealthy(ier), in an educated manner (meaning with as little speculation as possible).
---------
Take a simple example:
Shavixmir fantasises about driving around motorways at 180km's an hour.
In Holland this is a criminal act, in Germany it's legal and in India you'd have to be sick in the head to try it.
Should me drooling over a Renault Megane 1.6 16v Sports coupe, when I'm lying in bed, dreaming of racing around the Rotterdam ring-road, allow me to be fined?
Will me fantasizing about all this lead me to buy a Porche, then a Ferrari and then an Aston Martin with souped up F16 engines in real life? And go forever faster around the motorways?
1 edit
Originally posted by Nordlys...eventually to paedophilia
I can imagine that they could be harmful in other ways, for example by creating guilt. They might also be addictive in some cases, so that occasional fantasies would lead to frequent fantasies and eventually to paedophilia. That's just a guess, though. I also don't think it would be healthy if someone nurtured these fantasies.
more accurate: make more likely a clinical diagnosis of paedophilia (in America). (Even that, of course, doesn't require paedophiliac acts.)
Imagine I spend almost every waking hour thinking of ways to hurt people in incredibly cruel ways, etc. etc. I never actually act on any of these thoughts; in fact I live on a deserted island. And I am very kind to the animals.
Am I living a fully flourishing life? A good life?
How relevant is the number of these thoughts/fantasies that I have? And why?
Originally posted by shavixmirNo one is saying thoughts (of whatever kind) should be illegal.
This is like following a debate between two Republicans on the issue of a progressive tax system and how to evade it.
First of all you have to determine whether a paedofile is a criminal, is sick or just culturally different.
Then you have to determine whether "Thoughts" can be criminal (1984?).
Next you must justify a link between "thought" (o ...[text shortened]... tin with souped up F16 engines in real life? And go forever faster around the motorways?